Green Sheet Page 1 of 1
U‐4713B Categorical Exclusion July 2012
PROJECT COMMITMENTS
Campus Ridge Road Realignment
From Campus Ridge Road to E. John Street
Matthews, Mecklenburg County
Federal Aid Project No. STPDA‐3440(3)
W.B.S. No. 39077
STIP Project No. U‐4713B
Town of Matthews
Utilities (including power and telephone) along E. John Street will require relocation as a result of the
proposed project. Prior to construction, the Town will coordinate with utility companies to relocate
utilities along E. John Street in the project area.
U‐4713B Categorical Exclusion 1
Campus Ridge Road Realignment
From Campus Ridge Road to E. John Street
Matthews, Mecklenburg County
Federal Aid Project No. STPDA‐3440(3)
W.B.S. No. 39077
STIP Project No. U‐4713B
INTRODUCTION
The Campus Ridge Road Realignment project is included in the North Carolina Department of
Transportation (NCDOT) 2011‐2020 State Transportation Improvement Program (STIP) as Project U‐
4713B. No substantial environmental impacts are anticipated. This action is classified as a Federal
“Categorical Exclusion,” as defined by the Federal Highway Administration’s (FHWA) environmental
guidelines (23 CFR 771.117). Figure 1 shows the project study area.
I. PURPOSE AND NEED STATEMENT
The existing unsignalized T‐intersection of Campus Ridge Road and E. John Street is operationally
deficient, as measured by queue lengths.
The purpose of this project is to eliminate the operational deficiency at the intersection of Campus
Ridge Road and E. John Street.
The measure of success is to have queue lengths no longer than 200 feet for any turning movement
in the design year of 2035. This length was selected following discussions with traffic engineers, and
was based on existing queue length restrictions for movements at the intersections of Campus Ridge
Road/E. John Street and Stallings Road/Potter Road/E. John Street. SimTraffic was used to calculate
queues for each alternative.
Existing and projected queue lengths for the No Build Scenario at the intersection of Campus Ridge
Road and E. John Street are:
Table 1. Existing and Projected Queue Lengths – No Build Scenario
Approach
Existing Campus Ridge
Road/E. John Street
Existing
Storage
Length
Average Queue Length from SimTraffic
2011 No Build Scenario 2035 No Build Scenario
AM PM AM PM
Westbound right/left N/A 578 ft 453 ft 849 ft 741 ft
Southbound left 128 ft 21 ft 43 ft 22 ft 55 ft
U‐4713B Categorical Exclusion 2
Table 2. Projected Queue Lengths – Build Scenario
Approach
2035 Build Scenario
AM PM
Existing Campus Ridge Road/E. John Street
Westbound right/left 26 ft 16 ft
New Campus Ridge Road/E. John Street
Westbound left 144 ft 147 ft
Westbound right 130 ft 86 ft
Southbound left 141 ft 168 ft
II. PROJECT HISTORY
This project has been approved for federal funding through the Surface Transportation Program –
Direct Apportionment (STP‐DA), which will be distributed to the Town of Matthews by FHWA with
administration by NCDOT. The Town will supplement the federal funding with a twenty percent local
match.
Project U‐4713B was originally named “McKee Road Extension Segment B.” This name was chosen
because the project fell roughly on the same alignment as a larger project envisioned by
Mecklenburg County to extend McKee Road from Pleasant Plains Road to Stevens Mill Road. The
name of the project was changed to “Campus Ridge Road Realignment” by the Mecklenburg‐Union
Metropolitan Planning Organization (MUMPO) on January 18, 2012, and NCDOT changed the name
on the STIP in March 2012.
The Town, through their consultant, began designs in mid‐2008, and the first set of concept plans
were submitted to NCDOT for review in June 2009. Preliminary designs were completed in May 2012.
III. EXISTING CONDITIONS
The project is located within the city limits of Matthews in Mecklenburg County (see Figure 1). Much
of the surrounding area is undeveloped (forested or previously excavated). Development in the
vicinity is commercial and residential in nature.
Campus Ridge Road (SR 1460) is a two‐lane rural arterial with a posted speed limit of 35 miles per
hour (mph). The estimated (2011) annual average daily traffic (AADT) on Campus Ridge Road is 1,600
vehicles per day (vpd).
E. John Street (SR 1009) is a two‐lane undivided facility classified as a minor thoroughfare in the
Mecklenburg‐Union Metropolitan Planning Organization (MUMPO) Long‐Range Transportation Plan
(2004). The estimated (2011) AADT on E. John Street is 28,000 vpd, and it has a posted speed limit of
45 mph. E. John Street is named Old Monroe Road south of the Mecklenburg/Union County
boundary.
Sidewalks are located on Campus Ridge Road between the shopping center access road and E. John
Street, and on E. John Street/Old Monroe Road south of Aurora Boulevard. There are no bicycle
facilities. The Carolina Thread Trail is proposed to extend from Charlotte through Matthews, cross
U‐4713B Categorical Exclusion 3
under I‐485, link to CPCC, follow Campus Ridge Road, and continue south on E. John Street/Old
Monroe Road. No funding is currently available for this portion of the trail, and a completion date has
not been set. The proposed project does not include sidewalks or bicycle facilities at this time
because the Town of Matthews anticipates that the road will be widened in the future. The LRTP
includes objectives to develop streets and highways to include sidewalks and bicycle facilities in the
design of roadways, and the Town plans to incorporate multi‐modal accommodations when the road
is widened.
A traffic forecast was developed for the No Build and Build scenarios, as shown in Appendix A. Traffic
volumes are anticipated to increase to 4,500 vpd on Campus Ridge Road and approximately 45,000
vpd on E. John Street in the 2035 Build scenario. A traffic capacity analysis was completed to evaluate
the level of service and queuing for each alternative.
Eight crashes were reported at the intersection of Campus Ridge Road/E. John Street in the three
year period between July 1, 2008 and June 30, 2011, none of which were fatal. The table below
compares the crash rate with the critical crash rate near the intersection of Campus Ridge Road/
E. John Street and along a longer segment between Stallings Road/Potter Road and the I‐485
interchange. The crash rate on both segments is slightly lower than the critical crash rate.
Table 3. Crash Analysis
Roadway Segment
(E. John Street)
Length
(miles)
Total No.
of Crashes
Crash Rate (Crashes per 100 million vehicle
miles traveled (MVMT)
Crash Rate Critical Crash
Rate
Statewide
Average
Crash Rate*
Stallings Rd/Potter Rd to Ann St 0.20 30 511.07 520.19 233.07
Stallings Rd/Potter Rd to I‐485 1.32 146 376.87 380.40 233.07
* Based on 2008‐2010 NCDOT Three Year Crash Rates for 2‐lane undivided urban secondary routes
Overhead utilities, including power and telephone, are located along E. John Street. Underground
utilities on E. John Street include water lines and telecom. Power and telephone are located along a
portion of Campus Ridge Road. Approximately ten utility poles on E. John Street will need to be
relocated as part of the construction of turn lanes into Campus Ridge Road. Utility impacts are
anticipated to be relatively low.
IV. Alternatives
A. Description of the Preferred Alternative
The proposed project will realign approximately 1,500 feet of Campus Ridge Road, creating a new
intersection with E. John Street 2,500 feet north of the existing intersection. The existing Campus
Ridge Road would remain open, but the existing intersection of Campus Ridge Road and E. John
Street will be converted to right‐in/right‐out. The new Campus Ridge Road will be a two‐lane
undivided facility with ditch and shoulder, and will have a posted speed of 45 mph. The new full‐movement
T‐intersection of Campus Ridge Road and E. John Street will not be signalized at this time,
although a signal may be installed in the future if warranted by traffic volumes. This alternative was
designated as Alternative 4 during the alternatives development process. The preferred alternative is
shown on Figure 2.
U‐4713B Categorical Exclusion 4
B. Alternatives Eliminated From Further Consideration
The No Build Alternative, a “do‐nothing” alternative, would retain the existing alignment of Campus
Ridge Road. It would result in queues of longer than 200 feet on Campus Ridge Road, and therefore
does not meet the project purpose and need.
The first consideration was to add a traffic signal at the intersection of Campus Ridge Road and E.
John Street. However, this idea was eliminated due to the proximity of the existing Campus Ridge
Road/E. John Street intersection with the adjacent signalized intersection of Stallings Road/Potter
Road/E. John Street.
Five alternatives were considered as part of this project, as shown on Figure 3.
Intersection Improvement Alternative – Realign Campus Ridge Road to connect the western terminus
with the Stallings Road/Potter Road/E. John Street intersection, and modify the traffic signal to
accommodate the five‐legged intersection. In order to achieve the project purpose, additional
through and turn lanes were added so that the new five‐legged intersection is projected to meet the
measure of success of having queues no longer than 200 feet for any turning movement. This
resulted in either seven or eight lanes on each approach, which would impact 14 businesses.
Alternative 1 – Realign Campus Ridge Road to a point 1,100 feet north of the existing intersection of
Campus Ridge Road and E. John Street, and connect directly to Friendship Drive. It would utilize the
existing private service road for the industries on the west side of Campus Ridge Road. This was
determined to be the southernmost viable new alignment based on land uses, traffic patterns, and
potential impacts. Convert the existing intersection of Campus Ridge Road/E. John Street to a right‐in/
right‐out unsignalized intersection.
Alternative 2 – Realign Campus Ridge Road to a point 1,500 feet north of the existing intersection,
and connect directly to Forestmont Drive. Convert the existing intersection of Campus Ridge Road/
E. John Street to a right‐in/right‐out unsignalized intersection.
Alternative 3 – Realign Campus Ridge Road to a point 1,800 feet north of the existing intersection,
and terminate in a T‐intersection at E. John Street. Convert the existing intersection of Campus Ridge
Road/E. John Street to a right‐in/right‐out unsignalized intersection.
Impacts of the five new alternatives are shown on Table 4.
U‐4713B Categorical Exclusion 5
Table 4. Preliminary Summary of Environmental Impacts
Alternative
1
Alternative
2
Alternative
3
Alternative
4
Intersection
Improvement
Alternative
Project Length (mi) 0.54 0.50 0.46 0.44 0.75β
Relocations* Residential 0 3 4 0 1
Businesses 0 0 0 0 13
Total Relocations 0 3 4 0 14
New Right of Way (acres) 9.1 8.6 8.0 7.4 3.0
Prime Farmland (acres) 7.5 7.1 7.0 6.6 1.4
Wetlands (acres) 0.16 0.11 0.14 < 0.01 0
Streams (linear feet) 300 210 150 150 0
Cost (in millions)Δ $1.40 $1.29 $1.20 $1.14 $2.7
Federally Protected Species No effect No effect No effect No effect No effect
Note: Based on the preliminary assessment, there are no anticipated impacts for any alternatives for the following
categories: Minority/Low‐Income Populations – Disproportionate Impacts, Historic Properties, Community Facilities,
and Section 4(f).
β Includes approximately 0.25 mile realignment of Campus Ridge Road, 0.25 mile widening on E. John Street, and 0.25 mile
widening on Stallings Road/Potter Road.
* Relocations are estimated based on conceptual designs and a field visit. A relocation report has not been prepared.
Δ Cost was determined using NCDOT’s TIP Project Cost Analyzer 2.0 spreadsheet, and only includes construction costs.
V. ESTIMATED COSTS
The estimated costs, based on 2012 prices, are as follows:
Table 5. Estimated Project Cost
Preferred Alternative
(Alternative 4)
Total Construction Cost $905,000
Right‐of‐way Costs $525,000
Total Project Cost $1,430,000*
* Estimated cost for planning purposes only.
The estimated cost for the Campus Ridge Road Realignment in the 2011‐2020 STIP is $3,000,000,
including $1,300,000 for construction and $1,700,000 for right‐of‐way. Right of way is scheduled for
fiscal year (FY) 2012, and construction is scheduled for FY 2013.
VI. NATURAL ENVIRONMENT
Existing natural environmental conditions were documented in the Natural Resources Technical
Report (NRTR) (March 2012). These resources are described briefly below. A Jurisdictional
Determination package was submitted to USACE on July 19, 2011. Jurisdictional areas identified in
the project area were verified by USACE and NCDWQ on August 18, 2011. An Approved Jurisdictional
Determination was issued on December 16, 2011.
U‐4713B Categorical Exclusion 6
A. Physical Characteristics
Water Resources
Water resources in the study area are part of the Catawba River basin [U.S. Geological Survey (USGS)
Hydrologic Unit 03050103]. Two streams were identified in the study area (Table 6). The location of
each water resource is shown in Figure 4. The physical characteristics of these streams are provided
in Table 7.
Table 6. Water Resources in the Study Area
Stream Name Map ID NCDWQ Index Number Best Usage
Classification
UT to Four Mile Creek SA 11‐137‐9‐4 C
UT to Four Mile Creek SB 11‐137‐9‐4 C
Table 7. Physical Characteristics of Water Resources in the Study Area
Map ID Bank Height
(ft)
Bankful
Width (ft)
Water
Depth (in)
Channel
Substrate Velocity Clarity
SA 6 5 0‐4 Sand, silt,
cobble NA* Clear
SB 3 3 NA** Sand NA** NA**
*Baseflow limited to pools only; pools are not connected by riffles; no flow observed in stream channel
**Channel has been impacted by upstream sediment (~6‐7” observed in channel); no surface water flow observed in stream
channel
There are no designated anadromous fish waters or Primary Nursery Areas (PNA) present in the
study area. There are no designated High Quality Waters (HQW), Outstanding Resource Waters
(ORW), trout waters, or water supply watersheds (WS‐I or WS‐II) within 1.0 mile downstream of the
study area. The streams within the study area are not identified on the North Carolina 2010 Final
303(d) list of impaired waters.
Biotic Resources
Two terrestrial communities were identified in the study area: 19.4 acres of maintained/disturbed
and 4.6 acres of piedmont/mountain bottomland forest. A brief description of each community type
and a figure showing the location and extent of these terrestrial communities in the study area is in
the NRTR.
A variety of wildlife species are found within both the natural and disturbed habitats. Aquatic
communities in the study area are within one perennial piedmont stream and one
intermittent piedmont stream. Six species from the NCDOT Invasive Exotic Plant List for North
Carolina were found to occur in the study area.
U‐4713B Categorical Exclusion 7
B. Jurisdictional Topics
Surface Waters and Wetlands
Two jurisdictional streams were identified in the study area (Table 8). All jurisdictional streams in the
study area have been designated as warm water streams for the purposes of stream mitigation.
Table 8. Proposed Impacts to Water Resources
Map ID Impacted
Length (ft) Classification Compensatory
Mitigation Required
River Basin Buffer
SA 93 Intermittent Yes Not Subject
SB 135 Perennial Yes Not Subject
Total 228
One jurisdictional wetland was identified within the study area (Figure 4). Wetland classification and
quality rating data are presented in Table 9. The wetland in the study area is within the Catawba
River basin (USGS Hydrologic Unit 03050103). Wetland site WA is included within the
piedmont/mountain bottomland forest community.
Table 9. Proposed Impacts to Wetlands
Map ID NCWAM
Classification
Hydrologic
Classification
NCDWQ Wetland
Rating
Impacted Area
(acres)
WA Bottomland
Hardwood Forest Riparian 30 < 0.01
Total < 0.01
Permits
A Nationwide Permit (NWP) 23 will likely be applicable for this project. A NWP No. 33 may also apply
for temporary construction activities such as stream dewatering or work bridges. The USACE holds
the final discretion as to what permit will be required to authorize project construction. If a Section
404 permit is required then a Section 401 Water Quality Certification (WQC) from the NCDWQ will be
needed.
Federally Protected Species
As of September 22, 2010, the United States Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS) lists four federally
protected species for Mecklenburg County (Table 10). A brief description of the habitat
requirements for the three species with habitat within the study area follows Table 10, along with
the Biological Conclusion rendered based on survey results in the study area. Appendix C includes a
summary of the protected species survey, which was performed after the Natural Resources
Technical Report was completed. Habitat requirements for each species are based on the current
best available information from referenced literature and/or USFWS.
U‐4713B Categorical Exclusion 8
Table 10. Jurisdictional Characteristics of Wetlands in the Study Area
Scientific Name Common Name Federal
Status
Habitat
Present
Biological
Conclusion
Lasmigona decorata Carolina heelsplitter E No No Effect
Rhus michauxii Michaux’s sumac E Yes No Effect
Helianthus schweinitzii Schweinitz’s sunflower E Yes No Effect
Echinacea laevigata Smooth coneflower E Yes* No Effect
E ‐ Endangered
*=Marginal habitat
Carolina heelsplitter
Habitat Description: The Carolina heelsplitter was historically known from several locations within
the Catawba and Pee Dee River systems in North Carolina and the Pee Dee and Savannah River
systems, and possibly the Saluda River system, in South Carolina. In North Carolina, the species is
now known only from a handful of streams in the Rocky and Catawba River systems. The species
exists in very low abundances, usually within six feet of shorelines, throughout its known range. The
general habitat requirements for the Carolina heelsplitter are shaded areas in large rivers to small
streams, often burrowed into clay banks between the root systems of trees, or in runs along steep
banks with moderate current. The more recent habitat where the Carolina heelsplitter has been
found is in sections of streams containing bedrock with perpendicular crevices filled with sand and
gravel, and with wide riparian buffers.
Biological Conclusion – no effect. Suitable habitat for the Carolina heelsplitter does not occur in the
project study area in either Stream A or B (SA or SB) sites. The project crosses SA and SB but is over
30 miles upstream from the nearest population of Carolina heelsplitter in Sixmile Creek. Surveys for
the Carolina heelsplitter were conducted on January 17, 2012 by NCDOT biologists. No individuals of
Carolina heelsplitter were found. A review of NCNHP records on January 12, 2012 indicates no
known occurrences of the Carolina heelsplitter within the project area.
Michaux’s sumac
Habitat Description: Michaux’s sumac, endemic to the inner Coastal Plain and lower Piedmont,
grows in sandy or rocky, open, upland woods on acidic or circumneutral, well‐drained sands or sandy
loam soils with low cation exchange capacities. The species is also found on sandy or submesic loamy
swales and depressions in the fall line Sandhills region as well as in openings along the rim of Carolina
bays; maintained railroad, roadside, power line, and utility rights‐of‐way; areas where forest canopies
have been opened up by blowdowns and/or storm damage; small wildlife food plots; abandoned
building sites; under sparse to moderately dense pine or pine/hardwood canopies; and in and along
edges of other artificially maintained clearings undergoing natural succession. In the central
Piedmont, it occurs on clayey soils derived from mafic rocks. The plant is shade intolerant and,
therefore, grows best where disturbance (e.g., mowing, clearing, grazing, periodic fire) maintains its
open habitat.
Biological Conclusion – no effect. Suitable habitat for Michaux’s sumac is present in the study area
along roadside shoulders and utility easements. The USFWS optimal survey window for this species
is May through October. Surveys were conducted by KHA biologists throughout areas of suitable
U‐4713B Categorical Exclusion 9
habitat on August 8, 2011. No individuals of Michaux’s sumac were observed. A review of NCNHP
records, updated August 1, 2011, indicates no known occurrences within 1.0 mile of the study area.
Schweinitz’s sunflower
Habitat Description: Schweinitz's sunflower, endemic to the Piedmont of North and South Carolina.
The few sites where this rhizomatous perennial herb occurs in relatively natural vegetation are found
in Xeric Hardpan Forests. The species is also found along roadside rights‐of‐way, maintained power
lines and other utility rights‐of‐way, edges of thickets and old pastures, clearings and edges of upland
oak‐pine‐hickory woods and Piedmont longleaf pine forests, and other sunny or semi‐sunny habitats
where disturbances (e.g., mowing, clearing, grazing, blow downs, storms, frequent fire) help create
open or partially open areas for sunlight. It is intolerant of full shade and excessive competition from
other vegetation. Schweinitz’s sunflower occurs in a variety of soil series, including Badin, Cecil, Cid,
Enon, Gaston, Georgeville, Iredell, Mecklenburg, Misenheimer, Secrest, Tatum, Uwharrie, and Zion,
among others. It is generally found growing on shallow sandy soils with high gravel content; shallow,
poor, clayey hardpans; or shallow rocky soils, especially those derived from mafic rocks.
Biological Conclusion – no effect. Suitable habitat for Schweinitz’s sunflower is present in the study
area along roadside shoulders and utility easements. The USFWS optimal survey window for this
species is late August through October. Surveys were conducted by KHA biologists throughout areas
of suitable habitat on August 8 and October 20, 2011. Prior to both field surveys, reference
populations were visited at the UNC‐Charlotte Botanical Gardens. No individuals of Schweinitz’s
sunflower were observed. A review of NCNHP records, updated August 1, 2011, indicates no known
occurrences within 1.0 mile of the study area.
Smooth coneflower
Habitat Description: Smooth coneflower, a perennial herb, is typically found in meadows, open
woodlands, the ecotonal regions between meadows and woodlands, cedar barrens, dry limestone
bluffs, clear cuts, and roadside and utility rights‐of‐way. In North Carolina, the species normally
grows in magnesium‐and calcium‐rich soils associated with gabbro and diabase parent materials, and
typically occurs in Iredell, Misenheimer, and Picture soil series. It grows best where there is
abundant sunlight, little competition in the herbaceous layer, and periodic disturbances (e.g., regular
fire regime, well‐timed mowing, careful clearing) that prevents encroachment of shade‐producing
woody shrubs and trees. On sites where woody vegetation is held in check, it is characterized by a
number of species with prairie affinities.
Biological Conclusion – no effect. Areas of suitable habitat are present within the study area,
including roadside shoulders and utility easements. The USFWS optimal survey window for this
species is May through October. Although these areas are suitable for this species, they are mostly
comprised of a dense herbaceous layer, including invasive species such as Chinese lespedeza,
Japanese honeysuckle, and common dayflower that would minimize available sunlight and provide
significant competition for the smooth coneflower. Therefore, the study area contains marginal
habitat for this species. However, no individuals of smooth coneflower were observed by KHA
biologist while conducting surveys of these areas on August 8, 2011. A review of NCNHP records,
updated August 1, 2011, indicates no known occurrences within 1.0 mile of the study area.
U‐4713B Categorical Exclusion 10
Bald Eagle and Gold Eagle Protection Act
Habitat for the bald eagle primarily consists of mature forest in proximity to large bodies of open
water for foraging. Large dominant trees are utilized for nesting sites, typically within 1.0 mile of
open water. A desktop‐GIS assessment of the project study area, as well as the area within a 1.13
mile radius (1.0 mile plus 660 feet) of the project limits, was performed on August 1, 2011 using 2010
Orthoimagery. No water bodies large enough or sufficiently open to be considered potential feeding
sources were identified. Since there was no foraging habitat within the review area, a survey of the
project study area and the area within 660 feet of the project limits was not conducted. Additionally,
a review of the NCNHP database on August 1, 2011 revealed no known occurrences of this species
within 1.0 mile of the project study area. Due to the lack of habitat and known occurrences, it has
been determined that this project will not affect this species.
VII. HUMAN ENVIRONMENT
A. Section 106 Compliance Guidelines
This project is subject to compliance with Section 106 of the National Historic Preservation Act of
1966, as amended, and implemented by the Advisory Council on Historic Preservation’s Regulations
for Compliance with Section 106, codified at Title 36 CFR Part 800. Section 106 requires Federal
agencies to take into account the effect of their undertakings (federally funded, licensed, or
permitted) on properties included in or eligible for inclusion in the National Register of Historic Places
and afford the Advisory Council a reasonable opportunity to comment on such undertakings.
Historic Architecture/Archaeology
The Historic Preservation Office (HPO) reviewed the subject project and determined that no historic
resources would be affected by this project (see letters dated July 6, 2011 and April 13, 2012 in
Appendix B).
Community Impacts
Community resources and potential impacts to those resources are documented in the Community
Characteristics Report and Screening Indirect and Cumulative Effects Assessment (CIA/sICE) (May
2012).
This project will enhance access to the properties in the southwest quadrant of I‐485 and US 74,
including the CPCC campus. This link will become more important after CPCC Lane is closed at US 74,
as proposed as part of the Monroe Bypass plan. Hendrick Automotive, which owns the vacant
property next to CPCC, has committed to build a new road to connect US 74 with Matthews‐Indian
Trail Road.
The preferred alternative (Alternative 4) is not anticipated to have any residential or business
relocations, although one shed will be relocated. No adverse effect on public facilities or services is
expected. The project is not expected to adversely affect social, economic, or religious opportunities
in the area.
This project will have a minor effect on travel patterns in the Matthews/Stallings area. With the new
alignment alternatives, Campus Ridge Road will be realigned to create a new intersection with
E. John Street 2,500 feet north of the existing intersection. The existing intersection of Campus Ridge
U‐4713B Categorical Exclusion 11
Road and E. John Street will remain open, but will be converted to right‐in/right‐out. The new
Campus Ridge Road will be signalized in the future if warranted by traffic volumes.
The new alignment alternatives will increase exposure to properties between E. John Street and
Campus Ridge Road for a distance of approximately 1,500 feet.
This project is consistent with local land use and transportation plans. This project is not expected to
create a land use or transportation node, although some new development is likely to occur along
the proposed corridor. The Matthews Economic Development Plan identifies this area as a good
candidate for an office or industrial park, but difficulty in extending public utilities may restrict uses
other than residences with individual septic systems.
The farmland Protection Policy Act requires all federal agencies or their representatives to consider
the potential impact to prime farmland of all land acquisition and construction projects. All
construction will take place along existing alignment. The preferred alternative will affect
approximately 6.6 acres of prime farmland, and no farmland of statewide importance. As required by
the Farmland Protection Policy Act, the Form NRCS‐CPA‐106 has been completed according to FHWA
guidelines. The preferred alternative received a total point value of 15 points; since this is less than
60 points out of a possible 160 points, this project falls below the NRCS minimal criteria and will not
be submitted to the NRCS or be evaluated further for farmland impacts.
None of the block groups in the demographic area meet the criteria for Environmental Justice.
However, the neighborhood bounded by Pleasant Plains Road on the west, E. John Street on the east,
Morningwood Drive on the north, and Aurora Boulevard on the south is comprised of a mix of mobile
homes, single‐family homes, and a high‐density residential complex (apartments or condominiums).
According to the 2000 Census (the most recently available at the block level), 38.5% of housing units
(50 out of 130) were renter‐occupied (38.5%), which indicates a high likelihood of a low‐income
population in this neighborhood. However, the preferred alternative is not expected to impact
residents in this neighborhood. Therefore, this project will not have a disproportionately high and
adverse effect on any minority or low‐income population.
Indirect and Cumulative Effects
This project has a limited scope and is expected to have only a minor change in access and travel
patterns. It is not expected to create a land use or transportation node, although some new
development is likely to occur along the proposed corridor. Local planners expect that the proposed
project will have only a slight impact on development. It may encourage development along Campus
Ridge Road, but water and sewer constraints will likely limit the intensity and pace of development.
Between I‐485 and Campus Ridge Road on the north side of the Campus Ridge Road, water and
sewer are unavailable, and will need to be extended across I‐485. It will improve access to parcels in
the southwest quadrant of I‐485/US 74, but local planners do not expect the pace or type of
development in that area to change because of the proposed project.
Travel time is expected to increase by approximately 30 seconds for drivers turning left onto Campus
Ridge Road from E. John Street, a 2% increase based on the average commute time, with
approximately 80 vehicles making that movement in the peak hours. The (up to) 7‐minute decrease
in travel time for drivers turning left onto E. John Street from Campus Ridge Road would be a 25%
decrease based on the average commute time, with approximately 75 vehicles making that
movement in the peak hours.
U‐4713B Categorical Exclusion 12
Natural resources in the project vicinity are subject to 30‐foot Mecklenburg County surface water
improvement and management (S.W.I.M.) buffers, 30‐foot buffers within the Catawba River Basin,
either 50‐foot or 100‐foot buffers within the Yadkin‐Pee Dee River Basin (depending on the size of
the development), and 30‐foot buffers within the Crooked Creek Watershed. The two streams
crossed by the new road would require 30 foot buffers. Although this does not affect the design of
the road (and did not affect the selection or location of Alternative 4), it would affect future
development adjacent to the road.
This area is under the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA)’s Phase II NPDES program, and is
governed by MUMPO’s LRTP and Comprehensive Transportation Plan, Matthews’ Land Use Plan, and
Union County’s 2025 Comprehensive Plan.
With these regulations, constraints to development, and based on the topography of the area, the
combination of past, current, and future projects is expected to have a minor impact on notable
environmental resources in the vicinity. Cumulative effects of this project, when considered in the
context of other past, present, and future actions, and the resulting impact on notable human and
natural features should be minimal. Therefore, contributions of the project to cumulative impacts
resulting from current and planned development patterns are expected to be minimal.
Noise & Air Quality
This project is an air quality neutral project in accordance with 40 CFR 93.126. It is not required to be
included in the regional emissions analysis (if applicable) and project level CO or PM2.5 analyses are
not required. This project will not result in any meaningful changes in traffic volumes, vehicle mix,
location of the existing facility, or any other factor that would cause an increase in emissions impacts
relative to the no‐build alternative. Therefore, FHWA has determined that this project will generate
minimal air quality impacts for Clean Air Act criteria pollutants and has not been linked with any
special MSAT concerns. Consequently, this effort is exempt from analysis for MSATs. Any burning of
vegetation shall be performed in accordance with applicable local laws and regulations of the North
Carolina State Implementation Plan (SIP) for air quality compliance with 15 NCAC 2D.0520.
Noise levels may increase during project construction; however, these impacts are not expected to
be substantial considering the relatively short‐term nature of construction noise and the limitation of
construction to daytime hours. The transmission loss characteristics of nearby natural elements and
man‐made structures are believed to be sufficient to moderate the effects of intrusive construction
noise.
VIII. GENERAL ENVIRONMENTAL EFFECTS
This action is classified as a Federal “Categorical Exclusion,” as defined by FHWA’s environmental
guidelines (23 CFR 771.117). The project is included in the NCDOT 2012‐2020 STIP. Realignment of
Campus Ridge Road will reduce queues and resulting delays for traffic turning into or out of Campus
Ridge Road from E. John Street. The proposed project is not expected to have an adverse effect on
the quality of the human or natural environment with the use of current NCDOT standards and
specifications.
The project will require right‐of‐way acquisition (land) from eight parcels, and one shed will be
relocated. No residential or business relocations are anticipated. No adverse effect on public
facilities or services is anticipated. The project is not expected to adversely affect social, economic,
U‐4713B Categorical Exclusion 13
or religious opportunities in the area. There are no anticipated impacts from this project to publicly
owned public facilities, wildlife or waterfowl refuges, or sites of national, state, or local importance.
The project’s impact on noise and air will not be substantial. Noise levels could increase during
construction but will be temporary. It is anticipated that the project will impact 228 linear feet of
stream and less than 0.01 acres of wetlands.
Anticipated impacts to utilities include phone and power lines. Coordination with utility companies
for relocation plans will be complete before construction begins.
There are no resources in the study area protected by Section 4(f) of the US Department of
Transportation Act of 1966. Therefore, the project will not result in any Section 4(f) impacts.
No floodplain or floodway impacts are anticipated for this project. The proposed alignment would
not cross any existing major drainage structures (bridges, culverts and cross pipes that are 72” or
greater in diameter) or any significant natural drainage features or water bodies such as major
drainage swales, streams, rivers or ponds/lakes. The two minor streams crossed by the new
alignment will require small pipes (48” and 60”). The proposed road will involve the addition of
impervious roadway surface, which will most likely result in a relatively small net increase in
impervious surface. This net increase in impervious surface is assumed to have a relatively minor
effect on the existing volume and quality of storm water runoff.
An examination of records by Environmental Data Resources, Inc (EDR) revealed no underground
storage tanks (USTs) or hazardous waste sites within the proposed project corridor.
IX. COORDINATION & AGENCY COMMENTS
A scoping letter was mailed to the following agencies on June 10, 2011 asking for input regarding
anticipated permits or other known potential issues. A follow‐up letter was mailed on March 27,
2012 to update agencies about the change in the project’s name. Responses were received from
agencies marked in bold with an asterisk (*). Letters and additional agency comments are included in
Appendix B.
Federal Highway Administration
* US Environmental Protection Agency
US Fish and Wildlife Service
US Army Corps of Engineers
US Forest Service
* NC Department of Environment and
Natural Resources Division of Water Quality
* NC Department of Cultural Resources
(State Historic Preservation Office)
X. PUBLIC INVOLVEMENT
Citizens’ Informational Workshop (December 8, 2011)
Efforts were undertaken early in the project development process to contact regulatory agencies, local
officials, and the public. A newsletter was mailed to local residents and public officials in November
2011 announcing the Citizens’ Informational Workshop (CIW). The CIW was announced also via email to
local officials advertised in local newspapers and on the Town website.
The CIW was held on December 8, 2011 from 6:00 to 8:00 p.m. at the Matthews Community Center.
Two study area maps were presented in an informal setting. A total of 25 people signed in at the
U‐4713B Categorical Exclusion 14
workshop. Three comment forms were submitted. Some comments made by citizens during the
workshop include:
 Most people thought the project would improve operations at the intersection of E. John
Street/Stallings Road/Potters Street.
 A representative from CPCC stated that the construction of the Monroe Bypass would make
access to CPCC more difficult, and the realignment of Campus Ridge Road would be beneficial.
CPCC also provided a letter in support of the project.
 The two property owners who would be impacted by the project did not express opposition to
the project, but asked how to rezone their properties.
 Residents along Morningwood Drive asked if their trailer homes would be impacted.
There is not substantial controversy on social, economic, or environmental grounds concerning the
project.
XI. CONCLUSION
On the basis of the above discussion, it is concluded that no substantial adverse environmental impacts
will result from implementation of the project. The project is therefore considered to be a federal
“Categorical Exclusion” due to its limited scope and lack of substantial environmental consequences.
Figures
Figure 1 – Study Area
Figure 2 – Preferred Alternative
Figure 3 – Alternatives
Figure 4 – Natural Resources
Appendix
Appendix A – Traffic Forecast Figures
Appendix B – Scoping Letter Responses
Appendix C – Protected Species Survey Report
Figures
Figure 1. Study Area
Campus Ridge Road Realignment
TIP Project No. U-4713B
Matthews, Mecklenburg County
􀁍􄴀􀁣􆌀􀁋􄬀􀁥􆔀􀁥􆔀􀀠􂀀􀁒􅈀􀁤􆐀
􀁐􅀀􀁬􆰀􀁥􆔀􀁡􆄀􀁳􇌀􀁡􆄀􀁮􆸀􀁴􇐀􀀠􂀀􀁐􅀀􀁬􆰀􀁡􆄀􀁩􆤀􀁮􆸀􀁳􇌀􀀠􂀀􀁒􅈀􀁤􆐀
􀁐􅀀􀁯􆼀􀁴􇐀􀁥􆔀􀁲􇈀􀀠􂀀 􀁒􅈀􀁤􆓿􏿿􏼀
􀁓􅌀􀁴􇐀􀁡􆄀􀁬􆰀􀁬􆰀􀁩􆤀􀁮􆸀􀁧􆜀􀁳􇌀􀀠􂀀􀁒􅈀􀁤􆐀
􀁃􄌀􀁡􆄀􀁭􆴀􀁰􇀀􀁵􇔀􀁳􇌀􀀠􂀀􀁒􅈀􀁩􆤀􀁤􆐀􀁧􆜀􀁥􆔀􀀠􂀀􀁒􅈀􀁤􆐀
􀁅􄔀􀀠􂀀􀁊􄨀􀁯􆼀􀁨􆠀􀁮􆸀􀀠􂀀􀁓􅌀􀁴􇐀
􀁏􄼀􀁬􆰀􀁤􆐀􀀠􂀀􀁍􄴀􀁯􆼀􀁮􆸀􀁲􇈀􀁯􆼀􀁥􆔀􀀠􂀀􀁒􅈀􀁤􆐀
􀁃􄌀􀁐􅀀􀁃􄌀􀁃􄌀􀀠􂀀􀁌􄰀􀁮􆸀
􀁍􄴀􀁡􆄀􀁴􇐀􀁨􆠀􀁥􆔀􀁷􇜀􀁳􇌀 􀀭􂴀 􀁉􄤀􀁮􆸀􀁤􆐀􀁩􆤀 􀁡􆄀􀁮􆸀􀀠􂀀 􀁔􅐀􀁲􇈀 􀁡􆄀􀁩􆤀 􀁬􆰀􀀠􂀀􀁒􅈀􀁤􆓿􏿿􏽆
Fourmile Creek
Crooked Creek
Goose Creek
McAlpine Creek
South Fork Crooked Creek
Stevens Creek
Flat Branch
Davis Mine Creek
Paddle Branch
0 0.5 1
Miles
􀁐􅀀􀁲􇈀􀁯􆼀􀁪􆨀􀁥􆔀􀁣􆌀􀁴􇐀􀀠􂀀􀁖􅘀􀁩􆤀􀁣􆌀􀁩􆤀􀁮􆸀􀁩􆤀􀁴􇐀􀁹􇦣
£¤74
ß"16
ß"51
􀁍􄴀􀁅􄔀􀁃􄌀􀁋􄬀􀁌􄰀􀁅􄔀􀁎􄸀􀁂􄈀􀁕􅔀􀁒􅈀􀁇􄜀􀀠􂀀􀁃􄌀􀁏􄼀􀁕􅔀􀁎􄸀􀁔􅐀􀁙􅤀
􀁕􅔀􀁎􄸀􀁉􄤀􀁏􄼀􀁎􄸀􀀠􂀀􀁃􄌀􀁏􄼀􀁕􅔀􀁎􄸀􀁔􅐀􀁙􅥔
To Charlotte (13 miles)
To Monroe (15 miles)
To Pineville
(11 miles)
§¨¦485
􀁃􄌀􀁨􆠀􀁡􆄀􀁲􇈀􀁬􆰀􀁯􆼀􀁴􇐀􀁥􆗿􏿿􏼀
􀁉􄤀􀁮􆸀􀁤􆐀􀁩􆤀􀁡􆄀􀁮􆸀􀀠􂀀􀁔􅐀􀁲􇈀􀁡􆄀􀁩􆤀􀁬􆰀
􀁌􄰀􀁡􆄀􀁫􆬀􀁥􆔀􀀠􂀀􀁐􅀀􀁡􆄀􀁲􇈀􀁫􆬀
􀁍􄴀􀁡􆄀􀁴􇐀􀁨􆠀􀁥􆔀􀁷􇜀􀁳􇏿 􏿿􏼀
􀁍􄴀􀁩􆤀􀁮􆸀􀁴􇐀􀀠􂀀􀁈􄠀􀁩􆤀􀁬􆰀􀁬􆰀
􀁍􄴀􀁯􆼀􀁮􆸀􀁲􇈀􀁯􆼀􀁥􆔀
􀁓􅌀􀁴􇐀􀁡􆄀􀁬􆰀􀁬􆰀􀁩􆤀􀁮􆸀􀁧􆜀􀁳􇏜
Ü
k
k
k
k
k
k
k
k
k
k
􀁐􅀀􀁬􆰀􀁥􆔀􀁡􆄀􀁳􇌀􀁡􆄀􀁮􆸀􀁴􇐀􀀠􂀀􀁐􅀀􀁬􆰀􀁡􆄀􀁩􆤀􀁮􆸀􀁳􇌀􀀠􂀀􀁒􅈀􀁤􆐀
􀁃􄌀􀁡􆄀􀁭􆴀􀁰􇀀􀁵􇔀􀁳􇌀􀀠􂀀􀁒􅈀􀁩􆤀􀁤􆐀􀁧􆜀􀁥􆔀􀀠􂀀􀁒􅈀􀁤􆐀
􀁃􄌀􀁐􅀀􀁃􄌀􀁃􄌀􀀠􂀀􀁌􄰀􀁮􆸀
􀁍􄴀􀁡􆄀􀁴􇐀􀁨􆠀􀁥􆔀􀁷􇜀􀁳􇌀 􀀭􂴀 􀁉􄤀􀁮􆸀􀁤􆐀􀁩􆤀 􀁡􆄀􀁮􆸀􀀠􂀀 􀁔􅐀􀁲􇈀 􀁡􆄀􀁩􆤀 􀁬􆰀􀀠􂀀􀁒􅈀􀁤􆓿􏿿􏼀
􀁅􄔀􀀮􂸀􀀠􂀀􀁊􄨀􀁯􆼀􀁨􆠀􀁮􆸀􀀠􂀀􀁓􅌀􀁴􇐀
􀁓􅌀􀁴􇐀􀁡􆄀􀁬􆰀􀁬􆰀􀁩􆤀􀁮􆸀􀁧􆜀􀁳􇌀􀀠􂀀􀁒􅈀􀁤􆑃
CPCC
Interchange
Utility Towers
Commercial Node
Past Excavation Site
AEP Industrial Plant
Stallings Municipal Park
Mobile Home Neighborhood
Potential Future Auto Mall
Crooked Creek
Fourmile Creek
0 500 1,000
Feet
􀁐􅀀􀁲􇈀􀁯􆼀􀁪􆨀􀁥􆔀􀁣􆌀􀁴􇐀􀀠􂀀􀁓􅌀􀁴􇐀􀁵􇔀􀁤􆐀􀁹􇤀􀀠􂀀􀁁􄄀􀁲􇈀􀁥􆔀􀁡􆆣
£¤74
􀁍􄴀􀁅􄔀􀁃􄌀􀁋􄬀􀁌􄰀􀁅􄔀􀁎􄸀􀁂􄈀􀁕􅔀􀁒􅈀􀁇􄜀􀀠􂀀􀁃􄌀􀁏􄼀􀁕􅔀􀁎􄸀􀁔􅐀􀁙􅤀
􀁕􅔀􀁎􄸀􀁉􄤀􀁏􄼀􀁎􄸀􀀠􂀀􀁃􄌀􀁏􄼀􀁕􅔀􀁎􄸀􀁔􅐀􀁙􅦧
§¨¦485 Ü
Project Study Area
County Line
k Points of Interest
Streams
Figure 2. Preferred Alternative
Campus Ridge Road Realignment
TIP Project No. U-4713B
Matthews, Mecklenburg County
MECKLENBURG COUNTY
UNION COUNTY
Convert from full-movement
to right-in/right out
E John St
Potter Rd
Stallings Rd
Morningwood Dr
Campus Ridge Rd
Aurora Blvd
Campus Ridge Rd
30 Foot St
Forestmont Dr
Friendship Dr
Johnson Ln
Community Park Dr
Seaboard Dr
Anne St
Carl Rd
Hardwood Pl
West Cir
0 300 600
Feet
Proposed Edge of Pavement
Proposed Centerline
Proposed Driveway
County Line
Ü
Figure 3. Alternatives
Campus Ridge Road Realignment
TIP Project No. U-4713B
Matthews, Mecklenburg County
MECKLENBURG COUNTY
UNION COUNTY
Alt. 4
Alt. 3
Alt. 2
Alt. 1
E John St
Potter Rd
Stallings Rd
Pleasant Plains Rd
Suttle Pl
Morningwood Dr
Old Monroe Road
Campus Ridge Rd
Aurora Blvd
Campus Ridge Rd
30 Foot St
Forestmont Dr
Kerry Green Dr
Friendship Dr
Johnson Ln
Wyntree Ct
Vickie Ln
Community Park Dr
Seaboard Dr
Anne St
Carl Rd
Stallings Rd EXT
Industrial Catawba Cir N
Hardwood Pl
Shirley Rd
Woodfern Pl
West Cir
Pheasantwood Pl
Woodcalm Pl
0 300 600
Feet
Build New Alignment Alternatives
Alternative 1
Alternative 2
Alternative 3
Alternative 4
Improve Intersection Alternative
Wetlands
County Line
Ü
Source: USGS, Matthews Quad
Figure 4. Natural Resources
Campus Ridge Road Realignment
TIP Project No. U-4713B
Matthews, Mecklenburg County
MECKLENBURG COUNTY
UNION COUNTY
SA
SB
WA
E John St
Morningwood Dr
Campus Ridge Rd
30 Foot St
Friendship Dr
Johnson Community Park Dr
Anne St
Carl Rd
Hardwood Pl
0 300 600
Feet
Delineated Wetlands
Delineated Streams
Perennial RPW
Seasonal RPW
Proposed Edge of Pavement
Proposed Centerline
Proposed Driveway
County Line
Natural Resources Study Area
Ü
Appendix A
Traffic Forecast Figures
2011 AVERAGE ANNUAL DAILY
TRAFFIC
COUNTY: Mecklenburg DIVISION: 10
TIP: WBS:
DATE: 11-17-2011 PREPARED BY: Kimley-Horn and Associates, Inc.
L E G E N D
### No. of Vehicles Per
Day (VPD) in 100s
1- Less than 50 VPD
x
( d, t )
PM
K D
K
PM
D
( d, t )
Design Hour Factor (%)
PM Peak Period
Peak Hour Directional Split (%)
Indicates Direction of D
Duals, TT-STs (%)
Movement Prohibited
Proposed Roadway
Project: SR 3440 (McKee Rd) – Segment B From SR 1009 (East John St) to SR 3457
(Campus Ridge Rd)
No Build
McKee Rd
9
280
278
U-4713B Not Applicable
E John St/Old Monroe Rd
Campus Ridge Rd
16
140
73
7
4
(4,1)
PM
55 6
(4,1)
PM
60 7
(2,1)
PM
7 55
(2,1)
PM
8 60
Stallings Rd
Potter Rd
112
188
(2,1)
PM
7 65
(4,1)
PM
55 6
14
35
2035 AVERAGE ANNUAL DAILY
TRAFFIC
COUNTY: Mecklenburg DIVISION: 10
TIP: WBS:
PREPARED BY: Kimley-Horn and Associates, Inc.
L E G E N D
### No. of Vehicles Per
Day (VPD) in 100s
1- Less than 50 VPD
x
( d, t )
PM
K D
K
PM
D
( d, t )
Design Hour Factor (%)
PM Peak Period
Peak Hour Directional Split (%)
Indicates Direction of D
Duals, TT-STs (%)
Movement Prohibited
Proposed Roadway
Project: SR 3440 (McKee Rd) – Segment B From SR 1009 (East John St) to SR 3457
(Campus Ridge Rd)
No Build
McKee Rd
15
450
U-4713B Not Applicable
E John St/Old Monroe Rd
Campus Ridge Rd
26
11
(4,1)
PM
55 6
(2,1)
PM
7 55
446
218
122
6
(4,1)
PM
60 7
(2,1)
PM
8 60
Stallings Rd
Potter Rd
165
289
(2,1)
PM
7 65
(4,1)
PM
55 6
17
58
DATE: 11-17-2011
2011 AVERAGE ANNUAL DAILY
TRAFFIC
COUNTY: Mecklenburg DIVISION: 10
TIP: WBS:
PREPARED BY: Kimley-Horn and Associates, Inc.
L E G E N D
### No. of Vehicles Per
Day (VPD) in 100s
1- Less than 50 VPD
x
( d, t )
PM
K D
K
PM
D
( d, t )
Design Hour Factor (%)
PM Peak Period
Peak Hour Directional Split (%)
Indicates Direction of D
Duals, TT-STs (%)
Movement Prohibited
Proposed Roadway
Project: SR 3440 (McKee Rd) – Segment B From SR 1009 (East John St) to SR 3457
(Campus Ridge Rd)
286
278
U-4713B Not Applicable
E John St/Old Monroe Rd
Campus Ridge Rd
8
1
7
14
6
1-
8
20
28
(4,1)
PM
55 6
(2,1)
PM
7 55
(4,1)
PM
55 6
(2,1)
PM
55 7
(2,1)
PM
7 55
Build – Section B
284
73
4
(2,1)
PM
8 60
106
188
(2,1)
PM
7 65
(4,1)
PM
55 6
8
35
140
Potter Rd
(4,1)
PM
60 7
DATE: 11-17-2011
2035 AVERAGE ANNUAL DAILY
TRAFFIC
COUNTY: Mecklenburg DIVISION: 10
TIP: WBS:
PREPARED BY: Kimley-Horn and Associates, Inc.
L E G E N D
### No. of Vehicles Per
Day (VPD) in 100s
1- Less than 50 VPD
x
( d, t )
PM
K D
K
PM
D
( d, t )
Design Hour Factor (%)
PM Peak Period
Peak Hour Directional Split (%)
Indicates Direction of D
Duals, TT-STs (%)
Movement Prohibited
Proposed Roadway
Project: SR 3440 (McKee Rd) – Segment B From SR 1009 (East John St) to SR 3457
(Campus Ridge Rd)
U-4713B Not Applicable
Build – Section B
457
443
E John St/Old Monroe Rd
Campus Ridge Rd
13
1
12
23
9
1-
13
32
45
(4,1)
PM
55 6
(2,1)
PM
7 55
(4,1)
PM
55 6
(2,1)
PM
55 7
(2,1)
PM
7 55
454
121
6
(2,1)
PM
8 60
164
288
(2,1)
PM
7 65
(4,1)
PM
55 6
12
63
216
Potter Rd
(4,1)
PM
60 7
DATE: 11-17-2011
Stallings Rd
Appendix B
Scoping Letter Responses
March 22, 2012 Meeting Notes
Project R‐4713B Time: 9:45 AM
Attendees
 John Conforti, Zahid Baloch – NCDOT PDEA
 Donnie Brew, Mitch Batuzich – FHWA
 Ron Hairr, Teresa Gresham – Kimley‐Horn and Associates
 Chris Militscher – US EPA
Discussion
The purpose of this meeting was to respond to concerns and questions by Chris in EPA’s July 1, 2011
response to the project scoping letter. Those concerns included:
1. This entire project including both segments may be a candidate for the Merger process.
2. The entire project may need to be considered as one complete project that has demonstrated
independent utility.
3. The proposed new location project should demonstrate what avoidance and minimization
measures were considered to reduce jurisdictional impacts.
4. I recommend that the impacts to the human and natural environment from the entire project be
addressed in an Environmental Assessment.
Teresa summarized the work that the project team has done since last summer.
‐ A purpose and need statement has been prepared. The project purpose is to eliminate the
operational deficiency at the intersection of Campus Ridge Road and E. John Street, as measured
by queue lengths.
‐ An alternatives assessment has been prepared. An intersection improvement alternative was
analyzed, and four new alignment alternatives were considered. The preferred alternative is
Alternative 4.
‐ NCDOT and FHWA agreed that this project has independent utility based on its purpose and
need, and should move forward as a stand‐alone project. MUMPO has changed the name of the
project from “McKee Road Extension Segment B” to “Campus Ridge Road Realignment” in the
LRTP. NCDOT is in the process of changing the name of the project in the STIP.
‐ A qualitative indirect and cumulative assessment is being prepared. Although the segments
adjacent to this project are not funded and therefore are typically not considered reasonably
foreseeable, construction of the Campus Ridge Road Realignment may accelerate the adjacent
segments. However, due to constraints to providing water and sewer to the area, the pace of
development is expected to be slow.
The next steps are:
‐ Send a letter to agency members notifying them of the name change and updating them on the
project.
‐ Prepare a categorical exclusion (CE) with the preferred alternative.
Chris said that he felt the information satisfied his questions, and no longer needed to be involved in this
project since it is a CE‐level document. Specifically, in response to his email:
1. Since there are approximately 150 feet of impacts on streams and less than 0.01 acre of impact
on wetlands, he agreed that this project is not a candidate for Merger.
2. Since the segments of the McKee Road Extension adjacent to this project are unfunded, and
since independent utility has been demonstrated, this can be processed as an individual project.
3. Impacts are relatively low, and the project will continue to look for ways to minimize and avoid
impacts to jurisdictional resources.
4. Since this project has independent utility and the impacts are expected to be low, a CE is
appropriate.
Appendix C
Protected Species Survey Report
U-4713B
SR3448
SR4499
Wickerby
Biltmore Forest
SR5706
I485
Tank Town Road
Vinecrest
Clearbrook
Newburg
Fourmile Creek
Kilkenny Hill
SR3453
SR3457
SR5704
SR3453
SR3180
SR3177
SR3177
SR1524
SR2385
US74
SR1365
SR1560
SR1559
Vickie
Johnson
Seaboard
Greenbriar
SpruceFlowe
Smith
SR1367
SR1366
SR1368
Pawnee
SR2830
SR2834
SR2908
SR2829
SR1401
SR1419
SR1357
SR1009
SR1364
Aurora
SR1010 SR1009
SR1405
SR3555
SR3554
SR3440
Fair Forest
BrightmoorCrescent Knoll
Ridgebury
Wilcrest
Warehouse
Tracy
Shirley
SA
SB
Mckee Road SR 3440 Extension from John Street
SR 1010 to Campus Ridge Road SR 3457
U-4713B 0 0.25 0.5 1 Miles ¯

Click tabs to swap between content that is broken into logical sections.

Green Sheet Page 1 of 1
U‐4713B Categorical Exclusion July 2012
PROJECT COMMITMENTS
Campus Ridge Road Realignment
From Campus Ridge Road to E. John Street
Matthews, Mecklenburg County
Federal Aid Project No. STPDA‐3440(3)
W.B.S. No. 39077
STIP Project No. U‐4713B
Town of Matthews
Utilities (including power and telephone) along E. John Street will require relocation as a result of the
proposed project. Prior to construction, the Town will coordinate with utility companies to relocate
utilities along E. John Street in the project area.
U‐4713B Categorical Exclusion 1
Campus Ridge Road Realignment
From Campus Ridge Road to E. John Street
Matthews, Mecklenburg County
Federal Aid Project No. STPDA‐3440(3)
W.B.S. No. 39077
STIP Project No. U‐4713B
INTRODUCTION
The Campus Ridge Road Realignment project is included in the North Carolina Department of
Transportation (NCDOT) 2011‐2020 State Transportation Improvement Program (STIP) as Project U‐
4713B. No substantial environmental impacts are anticipated. This action is classified as a Federal
“Categorical Exclusion,” as defined by the Federal Highway Administration’s (FHWA) environmental
guidelines (23 CFR 771.117). Figure 1 shows the project study area.
I. PURPOSE AND NEED STATEMENT
The existing unsignalized T‐intersection of Campus Ridge Road and E. John Street is operationally
deficient, as measured by queue lengths.
The purpose of this project is to eliminate the operational deficiency at the intersection of Campus
Ridge Road and E. John Street.
The measure of success is to have queue lengths no longer than 200 feet for any turning movement
in the design year of 2035. This length was selected following discussions with traffic engineers, and
was based on existing queue length restrictions for movements at the intersections of Campus Ridge
Road/E. John Street and Stallings Road/Potter Road/E. John Street. SimTraffic was used to calculate
queues for each alternative.
Existing and projected queue lengths for the No Build Scenario at the intersection of Campus Ridge
Road and E. John Street are:
Table 1. Existing and Projected Queue Lengths – No Build Scenario
Approach
Existing Campus Ridge
Road/E. John Street
Existing
Storage
Length
Average Queue Length from SimTraffic
2011 No Build Scenario 2035 No Build Scenario
AM PM AM PM
Westbound right/left N/A 578 ft 453 ft 849 ft 741 ft
Southbound left 128 ft 21 ft 43 ft 22 ft 55 ft
U‐4713B Categorical Exclusion 2
Table 2. Projected Queue Lengths – Build Scenario
Approach
2035 Build Scenario
AM PM
Existing Campus Ridge Road/E. John Street
Westbound right/left 26 ft 16 ft
New Campus Ridge Road/E. John Street
Westbound left 144 ft 147 ft
Westbound right 130 ft 86 ft
Southbound left 141 ft 168 ft
II. PROJECT HISTORY
This project has been approved for federal funding through the Surface Transportation Program –
Direct Apportionment (STP‐DA), which will be distributed to the Town of Matthews by FHWA with
administration by NCDOT. The Town will supplement the federal funding with a twenty percent local
match.
Project U‐4713B was originally named “McKee Road Extension Segment B.” This name was chosen
because the project fell roughly on the same alignment as a larger project envisioned by
Mecklenburg County to extend McKee Road from Pleasant Plains Road to Stevens Mill Road. The
name of the project was changed to “Campus Ridge Road Realignment” by the Mecklenburg‐Union
Metropolitan Planning Organization (MUMPO) on January 18, 2012, and NCDOT changed the name
on the STIP in March 2012.
The Town, through their consultant, began designs in mid‐2008, and the first set of concept plans
were submitted to NCDOT for review in June 2009. Preliminary designs were completed in May 2012.
III. EXISTING CONDITIONS
The project is located within the city limits of Matthews in Mecklenburg County (see Figure 1). Much
of the surrounding area is undeveloped (forested or previously excavated). Development in the
vicinity is commercial and residential in nature.
Campus Ridge Road (SR 1460) is a two‐lane rural arterial with a posted speed limit of 35 miles per
hour (mph). The estimated (2011) annual average daily traffic (AADT) on Campus Ridge Road is 1,600
vehicles per day (vpd).
E. John Street (SR 1009) is a two‐lane undivided facility classified as a minor thoroughfare in the
Mecklenburg‐Union Metropolitan Planning Organization (MUMPO) Long‐Range Transportation Plan
(2004). The estimated (2011) AADT on E. John Street is 28,000 vpd, and it has a posted speed limit of
45 mph. E. John Street is named Old Monroe Road south of the Mecklenburg/Union County
boundary.
Sidewalks are located on Campus Ridge Road between the shopping center access road and E. John
Street, and on E. John Street/Old Monroe Road south of Aurora Boulevard. There are no bicycle
facilities. The Carolina Thread Trail is proposed to extend from Charlotte through Matthews, cross
U‐4713B Categorical Exclusion 3
under I‐485, link to CPCC, follow Campus Ridge Road, and continue south on E. John Street/Old
Monroe Road. No funding is currently available for this portion of the trail, and a completion date has
not been set. The proposed project does not include sidewalks or bicycle facilities at this time
because the Town of Matthews anticipates that the road will be widened in the future. The LRTP
includes objectives to develop streets and highways to include sidewalks and bicycle facilities in the
design of roadways, and the Town plans to incorporate multi‐modal accommodations when the road
is widened.
A traffic forecast was developed for the No Build and Build scenarios, as shown in Appendix A. Traffic
volumes are anticipated to increase to 4,500 vpd on Campus Ridge Road and approximately 45,000
vpd on E. John Street in the 2035 Build scenario. A traffic capacity analysis was completed to evaluate
the level of service and queuing for each alternative.
Eight crashes were reported at the intersection of Campus Ridge Road/E. John Street in the three
year period between July 1, 2008 and June 30, 2011, none of which were fatal. The table below
compares the crash rate with the critical crash rate near the intersection of Campus Ridge Road/
E. John Street and along a longer segment between Stallings Road/Potter Road and the I‐485
interchange. The crash rate on both segments is slightly lower than the critical crash rate.
Table 3. Crash Analysis
Roadway Segment
(E. John Street)
Length
(miles)
Total No.
of Crashes
Crash Rate (Crashes per 100 million vehicle
miles traveled (MVMT)
Crash Rate Critical Crash
Rate
Statewide
Average
Crash Rate*
Stallings Rd/Potter Rd to Ann St 0.20 30 511.07 520.19 233.07
Stallings Rd/Potter Rd to I‐485 1.32 146 376.87 380.40 233.07
* Based on 2008‐2010 NCDOT Three Year Crash Rates for 2‐lane undivided urban secondary routes
Overhead utilities, including power and telephone, are located along E. John Street. Underground
utilities on E. John Street include water lines and telecom. Power and telephone are located along a
portion of Campus Ridge Road. Approximately ten utility poles on E. John Street will need to be
relocated as part of the construction of turn lanes into Campus Ridge Road. Utility impacts are
anticipated to be relatively low.
IV. Alternatives
A. Description of the Preferred Alternative
The proposed project will realign approximately 1,500 feet of Campus Ridge Road, creating a new
intersection with E. John Street 2,500 feet north of the existing intersection. The existing Campus
Ridge Road would remain open, but the existing intersection of Campus Ridge Road and E. John
Street will be converted to right‐in/right‐out. The new Campus Ridge Road will be a two‐lane
undivided facility with ditch and shoulder, and will have a posted speed of 45 mph. The new full‐movement
T‐intersection of Campus Ridge Road and E. John Street will not be signalized at this time,
although a signal may be installed in the future if warranted by traffic volumes. This alternative was
designated as Alternative 4 during the alternatives development process. The preferred alternative is
shown on Figure 2.
U‐4713B Categorical Exclusion 4
B. Alternatives Eliminated From Further Consideration
The No Build Alternative, a “do‐nothing” alternative, would retain the existing alignment of Campus
Ridge Road. It would result in queues of longer than 200 feet on Campus Ridge Road, and therefore
does not meet the project purpose and need.
The first consideration was to add a traffic signal at the intersection of Campus Ridge Road and E.
John Street. However, this idea was eliminated due to the proximity of the existing Campus Ridge
Road/E. John Street intersection with the adjacent signalized intersection of Stallings Road/Potter
Road/E. John Street.
Five alternatives were considered as part of this project, as shown on Figure 3.
Intersection Improvement Alternative – Realign Campus Ridge Road to connect the western terminus
with the Stallings Road/Potter Road/E. John Street intersection, and modify the traffic signal to
accommodate the five‐legged intersection. In order to achieve the project purpose, additional
through and turn lanes were added so that the new five‐legged intersection is projected to meet the
measure of success of having queues no longer than 200 feet for any turning movement. This
resulted in either seven or eight lanes on each approach, which would impact 14 businesses.
Alternative 1 – Realign Campus Ridge Road to a point 1,100 feet north of the existing intersection of
Campus Ridge Road and E. John Street, and connect directly to Friendship Drive. It would utilize the
existing private service road for the industries on the west side of Campus Ridge Road. This was
determined to be the southernmost viable new alignment based on land uses, traffic patterns, and
potential impacts. Convert the existing intersection of Campus Ridge Road/E. John Street to a right‐in/
right‐out unsignalized intersection.
Alternative 2 – Realign Campus Ridge Road to a point 1,500 feet north of the existing intersection,
and connect directly to Forestmont Drive. Convert the existing intersection of Campus Ridge Road/
E. John Street to a right‐in/right‐out unsignalized intersection.
Alternative 3 – Realign Campus Ridge Road to a point 1,800 feet north of the existing intersection,
and terminate in a T‐intersection at E. John Street. Convert the existing intersection of Campus Ridge
Road/E. John Street to a right‐in/right‐out unsignalized intersection.
Impacts of the five new alternatives are shown on Table 4.
U‐4713B Categorical Exclusion 5
Table 4. Preliminary Summary of Environmental Impacts
Alternative
1
Alternative
2
Alternative
3
Alternative
4
Intersection
Improvement
Alternative
Project Length (mi) 0.54 0.50 0.46 0.44 0.75β
Relocations* Residential 0 3 4 0 1
Businesses 0 0 0 0 13
Total Relocations 0 3 4 0 14
New Right of Way (acres) 9.1 8.6 8.0 7.4 3.0
Prime Farmland (acres) 7.5 7.1 7.0 6.6 1.4
Wetlands (acres) 0.16 0.11 0.14 < 0.01 0
Streams (linear feet) 300 210 150 150 0
Cost (in millions)Δ $1.40 $1.29 $1.20 $1.14 $2.7
Federally Protected Species No effect No effect No effect No effect No effect
Note: Based on the preliminary assessment, there are no anticipated impacts for any alternatives for the following
categories: Minority/Low‐Income Populations – Disproportionate Impacts, Historic Properties, Community Facilities,
and Section 4(f).
β Includes approximately 0.25 mile realignment of Campus Ridge Road, 0.25 mile widening on E. John Street, and 0.25 mile
widening on Stallings Road/Potter Road.
* Relocations are estimated based on conceptual designs and a field visit. A relocation report has not been prepared.
Δ Cost was determined using NCDOT’s TIP Project Cost Analyzer 2.0 spreadsheet, and only includes construction costs.
V. ESTIMATED COSTS
The estimated costs, based on 2012 prices, are as follows:
Table 5. Estimated Project Cost
Preferred Alternative
(Alternative 4)
Total Construction Cost $905,000
Right‐of‐way Costs $525,000
Total Project Cost $1,430,000*
* Estimated cost for planning purposes only.
The estimated cost for the Campus Ridge Road Realignment in the 2011‐2020 STIP is $3,000,000,
including $1,300,000 for construction and $1,700,000 for right‐of‐way. Right of way is scheduled for
fiscal year (FY) 2012, and construction is scheduled for FY 2013.
VI. NATURAL ENVIRONMENT
Existing natural environmental conditions were documented in the Natural Resources Technical
Report (NRTR) (March 2012). These resources are described briefly below. A Jurisdictional
Determination package was submitted to USACE on July 19, 2011. Jurisdictional areas identified in
the project area were verified by USACE and NCDWQ on August 18, 2011. An Approved Jurisdictional
Determination was issued on December 16, 2011.
U‐4713B Categorical Exclusion 6
A. Physical Characteristics
Water Resources
Water resources in the study area are part of the Catawba River basin [U.S. Geological Survey (USGS)
Hydrologic Unit 03050103]. Two streams were identified in the study area (Table 6). The location of
each water resource is shown in Figure 4. The physical characteristics of these streams are provided
in Table 7.
Table 6. Water Resources in the Study Area
Stream Name Map ID NCDWQ Index Number Best Usage
Classification
UT to Four Mile Creek SA 11‐137‐9‐4 C
UT to Four Mile Creek SB 11‐137‐9‐4 C
Table 7. Physical Characteristics of Water Resources in the Study Area
Map ID Bank Height
(ft)
Bankful
Width (ft)
Water
Depth (in)
Channel
Substrate Velocity Clarity
SA 6 5 0‐4 Sand, silt,
cobble NA* Clear
SB 3 3 NA** Sand NA** NA**
*Baseflow limited to pools only; pools are not connected by riffles; no flow observed in stream channel
**Channel has been impacted by upstream sediment (~6‐7” observed in channel); no surface water flow observed in stream
channel
There are no designated anadromous fish waters or Primary Nursery Areas (PNA) present in the
study area. There are no designated High Quality Waters (HQW), Outstanding Resource Waters
(ORW), trout waters, or water supply watersheds (WS‐I or WS‐II) within 1.0 mile downstream of the
study area. The streams within the study area are not identified on the North Carolina 2010 Final
303(d) list of impaired waters.
Biotic Resources
Two terrestrial communities were identified in the study area: 19.4 acres of maintained/disturbed
and 4.6 acres of piedmont/mountain bottomland forest. A brief description of each community type
and a figure showing the location and extent of these terrestrial communities in the study area is in
the NRTR.
A variety of wildlife species are found within both the natural and disturbed habitats. Aquatic
communities in the study area are within one perennial piedmont stream and one
intermittent piedmont stream. Six species from the NCDOT Invasive Exotic Plant List for North
Carolina were found to occur in the study area.
U‐4713B Categorical Exclusion 7
B. Jurisdictional Topics
Surface Waters and Wetlands
Two jurisdictional streams were identified in the study area (Table 8). All jurisdictional streams in the
study area have been designated as warm water streams for the purposes of stream mitigation.
Table 8. Proposed Impacts to Water Resources
Map ID Impacted
Length (ft) Classification Compensatory
Mitigation Required
River Basin Buffer
SA 93 Intermittent Yes Not Subject
SB 135 Perennial Yes Not Subject
Total 228
One jurisdictional wetland was identified within the study area (Figure 4). Wetland classification and
quality rating data are presented in Table 9. The wetland in the study area is within the Catawba
River basin (USGS Hydrologic Unit 03050103). Wetland site WA is included within the
piedmont/mountain bottomland forest community.
Table 9. Proposed Impacts to Wetlands
Map ID NCWAM
Classification
Hydrologic
Classification
NCDWQ Wetland
Rating
Impacted Area
(acres)
WA Bottomland
Hardwood Forest Riparian 30 < 0.01
Total < 0.01
Permits
A Nationwide Permit (NWP) 23 will likely be applicable for this project. A NWP No. 33 may also apply
for temporary construction activities such as stream dewatering or work bridges. The USACE holds
the final discretion as to what permit will be required to authorize project construction. If a Section
404 permit is required then a Section 401 Water Quality Certification (WQC) from the NCDWQ will be
needed.
Federally Protected Species
As of September 22, 2010, the United States Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS) lists four federally
protected species for Mecklenburg County (Table 10). A brief description of the habitat
requirements for the three species with habitat within the study area follows Table 10, along with
the Biological Conclusion rendered based on survey results in the study area. Appendix C includes a
summary of the protected species survey, which was performed after the Natural Resources
Technical Report was completed. Habitat requirements for each species are based on the current
best available information from referenced literature and/or USFWS.
U‐4713B Categorical Exclusion 8
Table 10. Jurisdictional Characteristics of Wetlands in the Study Area
Scientific Name Common Name Federal
Status
Habitat
Present
Biological
Conclusion
Lasmigona decorata Carolina heelsplitter E No No Effect
Rhus michauxii Michaux’s sumac E Yes No Effect
Helianthus schweinitzii Schweinitz’s sunflower E Yes No Effect
Echinacea laevigata Smooth coneflower E Yes* No Effect
E ‐ Endangered
*=Marginal habitat
Carolina heelsplitter
Habitat Description: The Carolina heelsplitter was historically known from several locations within
the Catawba and Pee Dee River systems in North Carolina and the Pee Dee and Savannah River
systems, and possibly the Saluda River system, in South Carolina. In North Carolina, the species is
now known only from a handful of streams in the Rocky and Catawba River systems. The species
exists in very low abundances, usually within six feet of shorelines, throughout its known range. The
general habitat requirements for the Carolina heelsplitter are shaded areas in large rivers to small
streams, often burrowed into clay banks between the root systems of trees, or in runs along steep
banks with moderate current. The more recent habitat where the Carolina heelsplitter has been
found is in sections of streams containing bedrock with perpendicular crevices filled with sand and
gravel, and with wide riparian buffers.
Biological Conclusion – no effect. Suitable habitat for the Carolina heelsplitter does not occur in the
project study area in either Stream A or B (SA or SB) sites. The project crosses SA and SB but is over
30 miles upstream from the nearest population of Carolina heelsplitter in Sixmile Creek. Surveys for
the Carolina heelsplitter were conducted on January 17, 2012 by NCDOT biologists. No individuals of
Carolina heelsplitter were found. A review of NCNHP records on January 12, 2012 indicates no
known occurrences of the Carolina heelsplitter within the project area.
Michaux’s sumac
Habitat Description: Michaux’s sumac, endemic to the inner Coastal Plain and lower Piedmont,
grows in sandy or rocky, open, upland woods on acidic or circumneutral, well‐drained sands or sandy
loam soils with low cation exchange capacities. The species is also found on sandy or submesic loamy
swales and depressions in the fall line Sandhills region as well as in openings along the rim of Carolina
bays; maintained railroad, roadside, power line, and utility rights‐of‐way; areas where forest canopies
have been opened up by blowdowns and/or storm damage; small wildlife food plots; abandoned
building sites; under sparse to moderately dense pine or pine/hardwood canopies; and in and along
edges of other artificially maintained clearings undergoing natural succession. In the central
Piedmont, it occurs on clayey soils derived from mafic rocks. The plant is shade intolerant and,
therefore, grows best where disturbance (e.g., mowing, clearing, grazing, periodic fire) maintains its
open habitat.
Biological Conclusion – no effect. Suitable habitat for Michaux’s sumac is present in the study area
along roadside shoulders and utility easements. The USFWS optimal survey window for this species
is May through October. Surveys were conducted by KHA biologists throughout areas of suitable
U‐4713B Categorical Exclusion 9
habitat on August 8, 2011. No individuals of Michaux’s sumac were observed. A review of NCNHP
records, updated August 1, 2011, indicates no known occurrences within 1.0 mile of the study area.
Schweinitz’s sunflower
Habitat Description: Schweinitz's sunflower, endemic to the Piedmont of North and South Carolina.
The few sites where this rhizomatous perennial herb occurs in relatively natural vegetation are found
in Xeric Hardpan Forests. The species is also found along roadside rights‐of‐way, maintained power
lines and other utility rights‐of‐way, edges of thickets and old pastures, clearings and edges of upland
oak‐pine‐hickory woods and Piedmont longleaf pine forests, and other sunny or semi‐sunny habitats
where disturbances (e.g., mowing, clearing, grazing, blow downs, storms, frequent fire) help create
open or partially open areas for sunlight. It is intolerant of full shade and excessive competition from
other vegetation. Schweinitz’s sunflower occurs in a variety of soil series, including Badin, Cecil, Cid,
Enon, Gaston, Georgeville, Iredell, Mecklenburg, Misenheimer, Secrest, Tatum, Uwharrie, and Zion,
among others. It is generally found growing on shallow sandy soils with high gravel content; shallow,
poor, clayey hardpans; or shallow rocky soils, especially those derived from mafic rocks.
Biological Conclusion – no effect. Suitable habitat for Schweinitz’s sunflower is present in the study
area along roadside shoulders and utility easements. The USFWS optimal survey window for this
species is late August through October. Surveys were conducted by KHA biologists throughout areas
of suitable habitat on August 8 and October 20, 2011. Prior to both field surveys, reference
populations were visited at the UNC‐Charlotte Botanical Gardens. No individuals of Schweinitz’s
sunflower were observed. A review of NCNHP records, updated August 1, 2011, indicates no known
occurrences within 1.0 mile of the study area.
Smooth coneflower
Habitat Description: Smooth coneflower, a perennial herb, is typically found in meadows, open
woodlands, the ecotonal regions between meadows and woodlands, cedar barrens, dry limestone
bluffs, clear cuts, and roadside and utility rights‐of‐way. In North Carolina, the species normally
grows in magnesium‐and calcium‐rich soils associated with gabbro and diabase parent materials, and
typically occurs in Iredell, Misenheimer, and Picture soil series. It grows best where there is
abundant sunlight, little competition in the herbaceous layer, and periodic disturbances (e.g., regular
fire regime, well‐timed mowing, careful clearing) that prevents encroachment of shade‐producing
woody shrubs and trees. On sites where woody vegetation is held in check, it is characterized by a
number of species with prairie affinities.
Biological Conclusion – no effect. Areas of suitable habitat are present within the study area,
including roadside shoulders and utility easements. The USFWS optimal survey window for this
species is May through October. Although these areas are suitable for this species, they are mostly
comprised of a dense herbaceous layer, including invasive species such as Chinese lespedeza,
Japanese honeysuckle, and common dayflower that would minimize available sunlight and provide
significant competition for the smooth coneflower. Therefore, the study area contains marginal
habitat for this species. However, no individuals of smooth coneflower were observed by KHA
biologist while conducting surveys of these areas on August 8, 2011. A review of NCNHP records,
updated August 1, 2011, indicates no known occurrences within 1.0 mile of the study area.
U‐4713B Categorical Exclusion 10
Bald Eagle and Gold Eagle Protection Act
Habitat for the bald eagle primarily consists of mature forest in proximity to large bodies of open
water for foraging. Large dominant trees are utilized for nesting sites, typically within 1.0 mile of
open water. A desktop‐GIS assessment of the project study area, as well as the area within a 1.13
mile radius (1.0 mile plus 660 feet) of the project limits, was performed on August 1, 2011 using 2010
Orthoimagery. No water bodies large enough or sufficiently open to be considered potential feeding
sources were identified. Since there was no foraging habitat within the review area, a survey of the
project study area and the area within 660 feet of the project limits was not conducted. Additionally,
a review of the NCNHP database on August 1, 2011 revealed no known occurrences of this species
within 1.0 mile of the project study area. Due to the lack of habitat and known occurrences, it has
been determined that this project will not affect this species.
VII. HUMAN ENVIRONMENT
A. Section 106 Compliance Guidelines
This project is subject to compliance with Section 106 of the National Historic Preservation Act of
1966, as amended, and implemented by the Advisory Council on Historic Preservation’s Regulations
for Compliance with Section 106, codified at Title 36 CFR Part 800. Section 106 requires Federal
agencies to take into account the effect of their undertakings (federally funded, licensed, or
permitted) on properties included in or eligible for inclusion in the National Register of Historic Places
and afford the Advisory Council a reasonable opportunity to comment on such undertakings.
Historic Architecture/Archaeology
The Historic Preservation Office (HPO) reviewed the subject project and determined that no historic
resources would be affected by this project (see letters dated July 6, 2011 and April 13, 2012 in
Appendix B).
Community Impacts
Community resources and potential impacts to those resources are documented in the Community
Characteristics Report and Screening Indirect and Cumulative Effects Assessment (CIA/sICE) (May
2012).
This project will enhance access to the properties in the southwest quadrant of I‐485 and US 74,
including the CPCC campus. This link will become more important after CPCC Lane is closed at US 74,
as proposed as part of the Monroe Bypass plan. Hendrick Automotive, which owns the vacant
property next to CPCC, has committed to build a new road to connect US 74 with Matthews‐Indian
Trail Road.
The preferred alternative (Alternative 4) is not anticipated to have any residential or business
relocations, although one shed will be relocated. No adverse effect on public facilities or services is
expected. The project is not expected to adversely affect social, economic, or religious opportunities
in the area.
This project will have a minor effect on travel patterns in the Matthews/Stallings area. With the new
alignment alternatives, Campus Ridge Road will be realigned to create a new intersection with
E. John Street 2,500 feet north of the existing intersection. The existing intersection of Campus Ridge
U‐4713B Categorical Exclusion 11
Road and E. John Street will remain open, but will be converted to right‐in/right‐out. The new
Campus Ridge Road will be signalized in the future if warranted by traffic volumes.
The new alignment alternatives will increase exposure to properties between E. John Street and
Campus Ridge Road for a distance of approximately 1,500 feet.
This project is consistent with local land use and transportation plans. This project is not expected to
create a land use or transportation node, although some new development is likely to occur along
the proposed corridor. The Matthews Economic Development Plan identifies this area as a good
candidate for an office or industrial park, but difficulty in extending public utilities may restrict uses
other than residences with individual septic systems.
The farmland Protection Policy Act requires all federal agencies or their representatives to consider
the potential impact to prime farmland of all land acquisition and construction projects. All
construction will take place along existing alignment. The preferred alternative will affect
approximately 6.6 acres of prime farmland, and no farmland of statewide importance. As required by
the Farmland Protection Policy Act, the Form NRCS‐CPA‐106 has been completed according to FHWA
guidelines. The preferred alternative received a total point value of 15 points; since this is less than
60 points out of a possible 160 points, this project falls below the NRCS minimal criteria and will not
be submitted to the NRCS or be evaluated further for farmland impacts.
None of the block groups in the demographic area meet the criteria for Environmental Justice.
However, the neighborhood bounded by Pleasant Plains Road on the west, E. John Street on the east,
Morningwood Drive on the north, and Aurora Boulevard on the south is comprised of a mix of mobile
homes, single‐family homes, and a high‐density residential complex (apartments or condominiums).
According to the 2000 Census (the most recently available at the block level), 38.5% of housing units
(50 out of 130) were renter‐occupied (38.5%), which indicates a high likelihood of a low‐income
population in this neighborhood. However, the preferred alternative is not expected to impact
residents in this neighborhood. Therefore, this project will not have a disproportionately high and
adverse effect on any minority or low‐income population.
Indirect and Cumulative Effects
This project has a limited scope and is expected to have only a minor change in access and travel
patterns. It is not expected to create a land use or transportation node, although some new
development is likely to occur along the proposed corridor. Local planners expect that the proposed
project will have only a slight impact on development. It may encourage development along Campus
Ridge Road, but water and sewer constraints will likely limit the intensity and pace of development.
Between I‐485 and Campus Ridge Road on the north side of the Campus Ridge Road, water and
sewer are unavailable, and will need to be extended across I‐485. It will improve access to parcels in
the southwest quadrant of I‐485/US 74, but local planners do not expect the pace or type of
development in that area to change because of the proposed project.
Travel time is expected to increase by approximately 30 seconds for drivers turning left onto Campus
Ridge Road from E. John Street, a 2% increase based on the average commute time, with
approximately 80 vehicles making that movement in the peak hours. The (up to) 7‐minute decrease
in travel time for drivers turning left onto E. John Street from Campus Ridge Road would be a 25%
decrease based on the average commute time, with approximately 75 vehicles making that
movement in the peak hours.
U‐4713B Categorical Exclusion 12
Natural resources in the project vicinity are subject to 30‐foot Mecklenburg County surface water
improvement and management (S.W.I.M.) buffers, 30‐foot buffers within the Catawba River Basin,
either 50‐foot or 100‐foot buffers within the Yadkin‐Pee Dee River Basin (depending on the size of
the development), and 30‐foot buffers within the Crooked Creek Watershed. The two streams
crossed by the new road would require 30 foot buffers. Although this does not affect the design of
the road (and did not affect the selection or location of Alternative 4), it would affect future
development adjacent to the road.
This area is under the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA)’s Phase II NPDES program, and is
governed by MUMPO’s LRTP and Comprehensive Transportation Plan, Matthews’ Land Use Plan, and
Union County’s 2025 Comprehensive Plan.
With these regulations, constraints to development, and based on the topography of the area, the
combination of past, current, and future projects is expected to have a minor impact on notable
environmental resources in the vicinity. Cumulative effects of this project, when considered in the
context of other past, present, and future actions, and the resulting impact on notable human and
natural features should be minimal. Therefore, contributions of the project to cumulative impacts
resulting from current and planned development patterns are expected to be minimal.
Noise & Air Quality
This project is an air quality neutral project in accordance with 40 CFR 93.126. It is not required to be
included in the regional emissions analysis (if applicable) and project level CO or PM2.5 analyses are
not required. This project will not result in any meaningful changes in traffic volumes, vehicle mix,
location of the existing facility, or any other factor that would cause an increase in emissions impacts
relative to the no‐build alternative. Therefore, FHWA has determined that this project will generate
minimal air quality impacts for Clean Air Act criteria pollutants and has not been linked with any
special MSAT concerns. Consequently, this effort is exempt from analysis for MSATs. Any burning of
vegetation shall be performed in accordance with applicable local laws and regulations of the North
Carolina State Implementation Plan (SIP) for air quality compliance with 15 NCAC 2D.0520.
Noise levels may increase during project construction; however, these impacts are not expected to
be substantial considering the relatively short‐term nature of construction noise and the limitation of
construction to daytime hours. The transmission loss characteristics of nearby natural elements and
man‐made structures are believed to be sufficient to moderate the effects of intrusive construction
noise.
VIII. GENERAL ENVIRONMENTAL EFFECTS
This action is classified as a Federal “Categorical Exclusion,” as defined by FHWA’s environmental
guidelines (23 CFR 771.117). The project is included in the NCDOT 2012‐2020 STIP. Realignment of
Campus Ridge Road will reduce queues and resulting delays for traffic turning into or out of Campus
Ridge Road from E. John Street. The proposed project is not expected to have an adverse effect on
the quality of the human or natural environment with the use of current NCDOT standards and
specifications.
The project will require right‐of‐way acquisition (land) from eight parcels, and one shed will be
relocated. No residential or business relocations are anticipated. No adverse effect on public
facilities or services is anticipated. The project is not expected to adversely affect social, economic,
U‐4713B Categorical Exclusion 13
or religious opportunities in the area. There are no anticipated impacts from this project to publicly
owned public facilities, wildlife or waterfowl refuges, or sites of national, state, or local importance.
The project’s impact on noise and air will not be substantial. Noise levels could increase during
construction but will be temporary. It is anticipated that the project will impact 228 linear feet of
stream and less than 0.01 acres of wetlands.
Anticipated impacts to utilities include phone and power lines. Coordination with utility companies
for relocation plans will be complete before construction begins.
There are no resources in the study area protected by Section 4(f) of the US Department of
Transportation Act of 1966. Therefore, the project will not result in any Section 4(f) impacts.
No floodplain or floodway impacts are anticipated for this project. The proposed alignment would
not cross any existing major drainage structures (bridges, culverts and cross pipes that are 72” or
greater in diameter) or any significant natural drainage features or water bodies such as major
drainage swales, streams, rivers or ponds/lakes. The two minor streams crossed by the new
alignment will require small pipes (48” and 60”). The proposed road will involve the addition of
impervious roadway surface, which will most likely result in a relatively small net increase in
impervious surface. This net increase in impervious surface is assumed to have a relatively minor
effect on the existing volume and quality of storm water runoff.
An examination of records by Environmental Data Resources, Inc (EDR) revealed no underground
storage tanks (USTs) or hazardous waste sites within the proposed project corridor.
IX. COORDINATION & AGENCY COMMENTS
A scoping letter was mailed to the following agencies on June 10, 2011 asking for input regarding
anticipated permits or other known potential issues. A follow‐up letter was mailed on March 27,
2012 to update agencies about the change in the project’s name. Responses were received from
agencies marked in bold with an asterisk (*). Letters and additional agency comments are included in
Appendix B.
Federal Highway Administration
* US Environmental Protection Agency
US Fish and Wildlife Service
US Army Corps of Engineers
US Forest Service
* NC Department of Environment and
Natural Resources Division of Water Quality
* NC Department of Cultural Resources
(State Historic Preservation Office)
X. PUBLIC INVOLVEMENT
Citizens’ Informational Workshop (December 8, 2011)
Efforts were undertaken early in the project development process to contact regulatory agencies, local
officials, and the public. A newsletter was mailed to local residents and public officials in November
2011 announcing the Citizens’ Informational Workshop (CIW). The CIW was announced also via email to
local officials advertised in local newspapers and on the Town website.
The CIW was held on December 8, 2011 from 6:00 to 8:00 p.m. at the Matthews Community Center.
Two study area maps were presented in an informal setting. A total of 25 people signed in at the
U‐4713B Categorical Exclusion 14
workshop. Three comment forms were submitted. Some comments made by citizens during the
workshop include:
 Most people thought the project would improve operations at the intersection of E. John
Street/Stallings Road/Potters Street.
 A representative from CPCC stated that the construction of the Monroe Bypass would make
access to CPCC more difficult, and the realignment of Campus Ridge Road would be beneficial.
CPCC also provided a letter in support of the project.
 The two property owners who would be impacted by the project did not express opposition to
the project, but asked how to rezone their properties.
 Residents along Morningwood Drive asked if their trailer homes would be impacted.
There is not substantial controversy on social, economic, or environmental grounds concerning the
project.
XI. CONCLUSION
On the basis of the above discussion, it is concluded that no substantial adverse environmental impacts
will result from implementation of the project. The project is therefore considered to be a federal
“Categorical Exclusion” due to its limited scope and lack of substantial environmental consequences.
Figures
Figure 1 – Study Area
Figure 2 – Preferred Alternative
Figure 3 – Alternatives
Figure 4 – Natural Resources
Appendix
Appendix A – Traffic Forecast Figures
Appendix B – Scoping Letter Responses
Appendix C – Protected Species Survey Report
Figures
Figure 1. Study Area
Campus Ridge Road Realignment
TIP Project No. U-4713B
Matthews, Mecklenburg County
􀁍􄴀􀁣􆌀􀁋􄬀􀁥􆔀􀁥􆔀􀀠􂀀􀁒􅈀􀁤􆐀
􀁐􅀀􀁬􆰀􀁥􆔀􀁡􆄀􀁳􇌀􀁡􆄀􀁮􆸀􀁴􇐀􀀠􂀀􀁐􅀀􀁬􆰀􀁡􆄀􀁩􆤀􀁮􆸀􀁳􇌀􀀠􂀀􀁒􅈀􀁤􆐀
􀁐􅀀􀁯􆼀􀁴􇐀􀁥􆔀􀁲􇈀􀀠􂀀 􀁒􅈀􀁤􆓿􏿿􏼀
􀁓􅌀􀁴􇐀􀁡􆄀􀁬􆰀􀁬􆰀􀁩􆤀􀁮􆸀􀁧􆜀􀁳􇌀􀀠􂀀􀁒􅈀􀁤􆐀
􀁃􄌀􀁡􆄀􀁭􆴀􀁰􇀀􀁵􇔀􀁳􇌀􀀠􂀀􀁒􅈀􀁩􆤀􀁤􆐀􀁧􆜀􀁥􆔀􀀠􂀀􀁒􅈀􀁤􆐀
􀁅􄔀􀀠􂀀􀁊􄨀􀁯􆼀􀁨􆠀􀁮􆸀􀀠􂀀􀁓􅌀􀁴􇐀
􀁏􄼀􀁬􆰀􀁤􆐀􀀠􂀀􀁍􄴀􀁯􆼀􀁮􆸀􀁲􇈀􀁯􆼀􀁥􆔀􀀠􂀀􀁒􅈀􀁤􆐀
􀁃􄌀􀁐􅀀􀁃􄌀􀁃􄌀􀀠􂀀􀁌􄰀􀁮􆸀
􀁍􄴀􀁡􆄀􀁴􇐀􀁨􆠀􀁥􆔀􀁷􇜀􀁳􇌀 􀀭􂴀 􀁉􄤀􀁮􆸀􀁤􆐀􀁩􆤀 􀁡􆄀􀁮􆸀􀀠􂀀 􀁔􅐀􀁲􇈀 􀁡􆄀􀁩􆤀 􀁬􆰀􀀠􂀀􀁒􅈀􀁤􆓿􏿿􏽆
Fourmile Creek
Crooked Creek
Goose Creek
McAlpine Creek
South Fork Crooked Creek
Stevens Creek
Flat Branch
Davis Mine Creek
Paddle Branch
0 0.5 1
Miles
􀁐􅀀􀁲􇈀􀁯􆼀􀁪􆨀􀁥􆔀􀁣􆌀􀁴􇐀􀀠􂀀􀁖􅘀􀁩􆤀􀁣􆌀􀁩􆤀􀁮􆸀􀁩􆤀􀁴􇐀􀁹􇦣
£¤74
ß"16
ß"51
􀁍􄴀􀁅􄔀􀁃􄌀􀁋􄬀􀁌􄰀􀁅􄔀􀁎􄸀􀁂􄈀􀁕􅔀􀁒􅈀􀁇􄜀􀀠􂀀􀁃􄌀􀁏􄼀􀁕􅔀􀁎􄸀􀁔􅐀􀁙􅤀
􀁕􅔀􀁎􄸀􀁉􄤀􀁏􄼀􀁎􄸀􀀠􂀀􀁃􄌀􀁏􄼀􀁕􅔀􀁎􄸀􀁔􅐀􀁙􅥔
To Charlotte (13 miles)
To Monroe (15 miles)
To Pineville
(11 miles)
§¨¦485
􀁃􄌀􀁨􆠀􀁡􆄀􀁲􇈀􀁬􆰀􀁯􆼀􀁴􇐀􀁥􆗿􏿿􏼀
􀁉􄤀􀁮􆸀􀁤􆐀􀁩􆤀􀁡􆄀􀁮􆸀􀀠􂀀􀁔􅐀􀁲􇈀􀁡􆄀􀁩􆤀􀁬􆰀
􀁌􄰀􀁡􆄀􀁫􆬀􀁥􆔀􀀠􂀀􀁐􅀀􀁡􆄀􀁲􇈀􀁫􆬀
􀁍􄴀􀁡􆄀􀁴􇐀􀁨􆠀􀁥􆔀􀁷􇜀􀁳􇏿 􏿿􏼀
􀁍􄴀􀁩􆤀􀁮􆸀􀁴􇐀􀀠􂀀􀁈􄠀􀁩􆤀􀁬􆰀􀁬􆰀
􀁍􄴀􀁯􆼀􀁮􆸀􀁲􇈀􀁯􆼀􀁥􆔀
􀁓􅌀􀁴􇐀􀁡􆄀􀁬􆰀􀁬􆰀􀁩􆤀􀁮􆸀􀁧􆜀􀁳􇏜
Ü
k
k
k
k
k
k
k
k
k
k
􀁐􅀀􀁬􆰀􀁥􆔀􀁡􆄀􀁳􇌀􀁡􆄀􀁮􆸀􀁴􇐀􀀠􂀀􀁐􅀀􀁬􆰀􀁡􆄀􀁩􆤀􀁮􆸀􀁳􇌀􀀠􂀀􀁒􅈀􀁤􆐀
􀁃􄌀􀁡􆄀􀁭􆴀􀁰􇀀􀁵􇔀􀁳􇌀􀀠􂀀􀁒􅈀􀁩􆤀􀁤􆐀􀁧􆜀􀁥􆔀􀀠􂀀􀁒􅈀􀁤􆐀
􀁃􄌀􀁐􅀀􀁃􄌀􀁃􄌀􀀠􂀀􀁌􄰀􀁮􆸀
􀁍􄴀􀁡􆄀􀁴􇐀􀁨􆠀􀁥􆔀􀁷􇜀􀁳􇌀 􀀭􂴀 􀁉􄤀􀁮􆸀􀁤􆐀􀁩􆤀 􀁡􆄀􀁮􆸀􀀠􂀀 􀁔􅐀􀁲􇈀 􀁡􆄀􀁩􆤀 􀁬􆰀􀀠􂀀􀁒􅈀􀁤􆓿􏿿􏼀
􀁅􄔀􀀮􂸀􀀠􂀀􀁊􄨀􀁯􆼀􀁨􆠀􀁮􆸀􀀠􂀀􀁓􅌀􀁴􇐀
􀁓􅌀􀁴􇐀􀁡􆄀􀁬􆰀􀁬􆰀􀁩􆤀􀁮􆸀􀁧􆜀􀁳􇌀􀀠􂀀􀁒􅈀􀁤􆑃
CPCC
Interchange
Utility Towers
Commercial Node
Past Excavation Site
AEP Industrial Plant
Stallings Municipal Park
Mobile Home Neighborhood
Potential Future Auto Mall
Crooked Creek
Fourmile Creek
0 500 1,000
Feet
􀁐􅀀􀁲􇈀􀁯􆼀􀁪􆨀􀁥􆔀􀁣􆌀􀁴􇐀􀀠􂀀􀁓􅌀􀁴􇐀􀁵􇔀􀁤􆐀􀁹􇤀􀀠􂀀􀁁􄄀􀁲􇈀􀁥􆔀􀁡􆆣
£¤74
􀁍􄴀􀁅􄔀􀁃􄌀􀁋􄬀􀁌􄰀􀁅􄔀􀁎􄸀􀁂􄈀􀁕􅔀􀁒􅈀􀁇􄜀􀀠􂀀􀁃􄌀􀁏􄼀􀁕􅔀􀁎􄸀􀁔􅐀􀁙􅤀
􀁕􅔀􀁎􄸀􀁉􄤀􀁏􄼀􀁎􄸀􀀠􂀀􀁃􄌀􀁏􄼀􀁕􅔀􀁎􄸀􀁔􅐀􀁙􅦧
§¨¦485 Ü
Project Study Area
County Line
k Points of Interest
Streams
Figure 2. Preferred Alternative
Campus Ridge Road Realignment
TIP Project No. U-4713B
Matthews, Mecklenburg County
MECKLENBURG COUNTY
UNION COUNTY
Convert from full-movement
to right-in/right out
E John St
Potter Rd
Stallings Rd
Morningwood Dr
Campus Ridge Rd
Aurora Blvd
Campus Ridge Rd
30 Foot St
Forestmont Dr
Friendship Dr
Johnson Ln
Community Park Dr
Seaboard Dr
Anne St
Carl Rd
Hardwood Pl
West Cir
0 300 600
Feet
Proposed Edge of Pavement
Proposed Centerline
Proposed Driveway
County Line
Ü
Figure 3. Alternatives
Campus Ridge Road Realignment
TIP Project No. U-4713B
Matthews, Mecklenburg County
MECKLENBURG COUNTY
UNION COUNTY
Alt. 4
Alt. 3
Alt. 2
Alt. 1
E John St
Potter Rd
Stallings Rd
Pleasant Plains Rd
Suttle Pl
Morningwood Dr
Old Monroe Road
Campus Ridge Rd
Aurora Blvd
Campus Ridge Rd
30 Foot St
Forestmont Dr
Kerry Green Dr
Friendship Dr
Johnson Ln
Wyntree Ct
Vickie Ln
Community Park Dr
Seaboard Dr
Anne St
Carl Rd
Stallings Rd EXT
Industrial Catawba Cir N
Hardwood Pl
Shirley Rd
Woodfern Pl
West Cir
Pheasantwood Pl
Woodcalm Pl
0 300 600
Feet
Build New Alignment Alternatives
Alternative 1
Alternative 2
Alternative 3
Alternative 4
Improve Intersection Alternative
Wetlands
County Line
Ü
Source: USGS, Matthews Quad
Figure 4. Natural Resources
Campus Ridge Road Realignment
TIP Project No. U-4713B
Matthews, Mecklenburg County
MECKLENBURG COUNTY
UNION COUNTY
SA
SB
WA
E John St
Morningwood Dr
Campus Ridge Rd
30 Foot St
Friendship Dr
Johnson Community Park Dr
Anne St
Carl Rd
Hardwood Pl
0 300 600
Feet
Delineated Wetlands
Delineated Streams
Perennial RPW
Seasonal RPW
Proposed Edge of Pavement
Proposed Centerline
Proposed Driveway
County Line
Natural Resources Study Area
Ü
Appendix A
Traffic Forecast Figures
2011 AVERAGE ANNUAL DAILY
TRAFFIC
COUNTY: Mecklenburg DIVISION: 10
TIP: WBS:
DATE: 11-17-2011 PREPARED BY: Kimley-Horn and Associates, Inc.
L E G E N D
### No. of Vehicles Per
Day (VPD) in 100s
1- Less than 50 VPD
x
( d, t )
PM
K D
K
PM
D
( d, t )
Design Hour Factor (%)
PM Peak Period
Peak Hour Directional Split (%)
Indicates Direction of D
Duals, TT-STs (%)
Movement Prohibited
Proposed Roadway
Project: SR 3440 (McKee Rd) – Segment B From SR 1009 (East John St) to SR 3457
(Campus Ridge Rd)
No Build
McKee Rd
9
280
278
U-4713B Not Applicable
E John St/Old Monroe Rd
Campus Ridge Rd
16
140
73
7
4
(4,1)
PM
55 6
(4,1)
PM
60 7
(2,1)
PM
7 55
(2,1)
PM
8 60
Stallings Rd
Potter Rd
112
188
(2,1)
PM
7 65
(4,1)
PM
55 6
14
35
2035 AVERAGE ANNUAL DAILY
TRAFFIC
COUNTY: Mecklenburg DIVISION: 10
TIP: WBS:
PREPARED BY: Kimley-Horn and Associates, Inc.
L E G E N D
### No. of Vehicles Per
Day (VPD) in 100s
1- Less than 50 VPD
x
( d, t )
PM
K D
K
PM
D
( d, t )
Design Hour Factor (%)
PM Peak Period
Peak Hour Directional Split (%)
Indicates Direction of D
Duals, TT-STs (%)
Movement Prohibited
Proposed Roadway
Project: SR 3440 (McKee Rd) – Segment B From SR 1009 (East John St) to SR 3457
(Campus Ridge Rd)
No Build
McKee Rd
15
450
U-4713B Not Applicable
E John St/Old Monroe Rd
Campus Ridge Rd
26
11
(4,1)
PM
55 6
(2,1)
PM
7 55
446
218
122
6
(4,1)
PM
60 7
(2,1)
PM
8 60
Stallings Rd
Potter Rd
165
289
(2,1)
PM
7 65
(4,1)
PM
55 6
17
58
DATE: 11-17-2011
2011 AVERAGE ANNUAL DAILY
TRAFFIC
COUNTY: Mecklenburg DIVISION: 10
TIP: WBS:
PREPARED BY: Kimley-Horn and Associates, Inc.
L E G E N D
### No. of Vehicles Per
Day (VPD) in 100s
1- Less than 50 VPD
x
( d, t )
PM
K D
K
PM
D
( d, t )
Design Hour Factor (%)
PM Peak Period
Peak Hour Directional Split (%)
Indicates Direction of D
Duals, TT-STs (%)
Movement Prohibited
Proposed Roadway
Project: SR 3440 (McKee Rd) – Segment B From SR 1009 (East John St) to SR 3457
(Campus Ridge Rd)
286
278
U-4713B Not Applicable
E John St/Old Monroe Rd
Campus Ridge Rd
8
1
7
14
6
1-
8
20
28
(4,1)
PM
55 6
(2,1)
PM
7 55
(4,1)
PM
55 6
(2,1)
PM
55 7
(2,1)
PM
7 55
Build – Section B
284
73
4
(2,1)
PM
8 60
106
188
(2,1)
PM
7 65
(4,1)
PM
55 6
8
35
140
Potter Rd
(4,1)
PM
60 7
DATE: 11-17-2011
2035 AVERAGE ANNUAL DAILY
TRAFFIC
COUNTY: Mecklenburg DIVISION: 10
TIP: WBS:
PREPARED BY: Kimley-Horn and Associates, Inc.
L E G E N D
### No. of Vehicles Per
Day (VPD) in 100s
1- Less than 50 VPD
x
( d, t )
PM
K D
K
PM
D
( d, t )
Design Hour Factor (%)
PM Peak Period
Peak Hour Directional Split (%)
Indicates Direction of D
Duals, TT-STs (%)
Movement Prohibited
Proposed Roadway
Project: SR 3440 (McKee Rd) – Segment B From SR 1009 (East John St) to SR 3457
(Campus Ridge Rd)
U-4713B Not Applicable
Build – Section B
457
443
E John St/Old Monroe Rd
Campus Ridge Rd
13
1
12
23
9
1-
13
32
45
(4,1)
PM
55 6
(2,1)
PM
7 55
(4,1)
PM
55 6
(2,1)
PM
55 7
(2,1)
PM
7 55
454
121
6
(2,1)
PM
8 60
164
288
(2,1)
PM
7 65
(4,1)
PM
55 6
12
63
216
Potter Rd
(4,1)
PM
60 7
DATE: 11-17-2011
Stallings Rd
Appendix B
Scoping Letter Responses
March 22, 2012 Meeting Notes
Project R‐4713B Time: 9:45 AM
Attendees
 John Conforti, Zahid Baloch – NCDOT PDEA
 Donnie Brew, Mitch Batuzich – FHWA
 Ron Hairr, Teresa Gresham – Kimley‐Horn and Associates
 Chris Militscher – US EPA
Discussion
The purpose of this meeting was to respond to concerns and questions by Chris in EPA’s July 1, 2011
response to the project scoping letter. Those concerns included:
1. This entire project including both segments may be a candidate for the Merger process.
2. The entire project may need to be considered as one complete project that has demonstrated
independent utility.
3. The proposed new location project should demonstrate what avoidance and minimization
measures were considered to reduce jurisdictional impacts.
4. I recommend that the impacts to the human and natural environment from the entire project be
addressed in an Environmental Assessment.
Teresa summarized the work that the project team has done since last summer.
‐ A purpose and need statement has been prepared. The project purpose is to eliminate the
operational deficiency at the intersection of Campus Ridge Road and E. John Street, as measured
by queue lengths.
‐ An alternatives assessment has been prepared. An intersection improvement alternative was
analyzed, and four new alignment alternatives were considered. The preferred alternative is
Alternative 4.
‐ NCDOT and FHWA agreed that this project has independent utility based on its purpose and
need, and should move forward as a stand‐alone project. MUMPO has changed the name of the
project from “McKee Road Extension Segment B” to “Campus Ridge Road Realignment” in the
LRTP. NCDOT is in the process of changing the name of the project in the STIP.
‐ A qualitative indirect and cumulative assessment is being prepared. Although the segments
adjacent to this project are not funded and therefore are typically not considered reasonably
foreseeable, construction of the Campus Ridge Road Realignment may accelerate the adjacent
segments. However, due to constraints to providing water and sewer to the area, the pace of
development is expected to be slow.
The next steps are:
‐ Send a letter to agency members notifying them of the name change and updating them on the
project.
‐ Prepare a categorical exclusion (CE) with the preferred alternative.
Chris said that he felt the information satisfied his questions, and no longer needed to be involved in this
project since it is a CE‐level document. Specifically, in response to his email:
1. Since there are approximately 150 feet of impacts on streams and less than 0.01 acre of impact
on wetlands, he agreed that this project is not a candidate for Merger.
2. Since the segments of the McKee Road Extension adjacent to this project are unfunded, and
since independent utility has been demonstrated, this can be processed as an individual project.
3. Impacts are relatively low, and the project will continue to look for ways to minimize and avoid
impacts to jurisdictional resources.
4. Since this project has independent utility and the impacts are expected to be low, a CE is
appropriate.
Appendix C
Protected Species Survey Report
U-4713B
SR3448
SR4499
Wickerby
Biltmore Forest
SR5706
I485
Tank Town Road
Vinecrest
Clearbrook
Newburg
Fourmile Creek
Kilkenny Hill
SR3453
SR3457
SR5704
SR3453
SR3180
SR3177
SR3177
SR1524
SR2385
US74
SR1365
SR1560
SR1559
Vickie
Johnson
Seaboard
Greenbriar
SpruceFlowe
Smith
SR1367
SR1366
SR1368
Pawnee
SR2830
SR2834
SR2908
SR2829
SR1401
SR1419
SR1357
SR1009
SR1364
Aurora
SR1010 SR1009
SR1405
SR3555
SR3554
SR3440
Fair Forest
BrightmoorCrescent Knoll
Ridgebury
Wilcrest
Warehouse
Tracy
Shirley
SA
SB
Mckee Road SR 3440 Extension from John Street
SR 1010 to Campus Ridge Road SR 3457
U-4713B 0 0.25 0.5 1 Miles ¯